Where Have All the Presbyterians Gone? They Joined Networks

Published on by D. G. Hart

Russell Moore, academic dean at Southern Baptist Seminary, wrote a piece for the Wall Street Journal that attracted the attention of many Presbyterians thanks to his title, “Where Have All the Presbyterians Gone?” Since Moore is a Southern Baptist, perhaps he should not have weighed in on matters Presbyterian. But then again, asking the question “Where Have All the Baptists Gone?” would be silly since the Southern Baptist Convention weighs in a the largest Protestant entity in the United States. We can’t really call it a denomination or a communion because being Baptist is premised on preserving the authority and autonomy of the local congregation.

Moore’s point was not so much to tell Presbyterians to shape up but to observe the decline of denominationalism in the United States – or more accurately, the loss of denominational brands for believers’ identity, such as “Hug me, I’m a Presbyterian.” He writes:

Studies conducted by secular and Christian organizations indicate that we are. Fewer and fewer American Christians, especially Protestants, strongly identify with a particular religious communion—Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, etc. According to the Baylor Survey on Religion, nondenominational churches now represent the second largest group of Protestant churches in America, and they are also the fastest growing.

Moore argues that the rise of megachurches corresponds to Americans looking for church for practical reasons: “Is the nursery easy to find? Do I like the music? Are there support groups for those grappling with addiction?” If people bring these concerns to a Baptist church, they may be disappointed: “A church that requires immersion baptism before taking communion, as most Baptist traditions do, will likely get indignant complaints from evangelical visitors who feel like they’ve been denied service at a restaurant.”

But Moore sees some hopeful signs for a return to an older understanding of church, grounded in a doctrinal and evangelistic identity. One sign is the growth of the Southern Baptist Convention, which has 10,000 seminarians now a six different schools.

Moore concludes:

If denominationalism simply denotes a “brand” vying for market share, then let denominationalism fall. But many of us believe denominations can represent fidelity to living traditions of local congregations that care about what Jesus cared about—personal conversion, discipleship, mission and community. Perhaps the denominational era has just begun.

The SBC may not be the best case for denominationalism not simply because it is self-consciously not a denomination but also because it hardly has the order or unity that insures a SBC congregation in Saddleback, California will be remotely similar to one in Louisville, Kentucky. But the point about the decline of denominations is fitting and the example of Presbyterians is a good one. Aside from the mainline PCUSA, which continue to hemorrhage its millions, the largest Presbyterians denominations are in the thousands: the PCA at roughly 300,000, the EPC at approximately 60,000, and the OPC bringing up the rear at around 30,000.

One factor in Presbyterian decline that Moore should not have been expected to acknowledge (since you need some local knowledge) is the phenomenon of Presbyterians becoming networkers. An irony of Moore’s piece is that it came out the same week that David Nicholas, one of the leaders in church networking, died. The founding pastor of Spanish River Church (PCA) in Boca Raton, Florida, Nicholas also established the Church Planting Network, which according to the website has nine churches around the world.

That may seem an insignificant number until you factor in that Nicholas was an important force behind two other significant church planting networks: Acts 29 and Redeemer City to City. Nicholas’ Church Planting Network may not have impressive numbers, at least according to its website, but his congregation, Spanish River, helped to plant close to forty other churches in the PCA, including Keller’s Redeemer Presbyterian Church. It is hard not to imagine that the idea for Keller’s Redeemer City to City network of churches came from Nicholas’ own Church Planting Network.

But even more impressive, if you’re of the New School Presbyterian worldview, is Nicholas’ connection to Mark Driscoll and the Acts 29 Network. According to the Acts 29 website:

Pastor Mark Driscoll founded the Acts 29 Network with Nicholas in 2000. Nicholas was influential in starting many current Acts 29 churches, and provided much support for many of our church planters.

The list of congregations associate with Acts 29 is too long to count – though it does feature some nifty logos (which also make the page a bit tardy in loading) – but it indicates another successful network that traces its roots to Nicholas. I am almost tempted to say that Nicholas is the man behind the Gospel Coalition since his fingerprints are all over two of the larger celebrities in that phalanx of Christian allies. Which makes Nicholas the leaven for yet another network of congregations, since the Gospel Coalition is also web of congregations.

And just when we were finished with Presbyterian networks comes news of yet another Presbyterian connection of congregations, in this case a group of churches from the mainline PCUSA who have finally concluded that their denomination is “deathly ill.” As such, these pastors believe a new form of connection is important for Presbyterian conservatives:

We believe the PC(USA) will not survive without drastic intervention, and stand ready to DO something different, to thrive as the Body of Christ. We call others of like mind to envision a new future for congregations that share our Presbyterian, Reformed, Evangelical heritage. If the denomination has the ability and will to move in this new direction, we will rejoice. Regardless, a group of us will change course, forming a new way for our congregations to relate. We hate the appearance of schism – but the PC(USA) is divided already. Our proposal only acknowledges the fractured denomination we have become.

In which case, the answer to Moore’s column is this: Presbyterians abandoned the structures that made their denominations tick – such instrumentalities as sessions, presbyteries, synods, and assemblies for overseeing the ministry of word and sacrament. Instead of being Presbyterian, many Presbyterians find more congenial surroundings in locales where the schmoozing, entrepreneurialism and informal alliance-building are characteristic of being the church. Have they swapped Presbyterianism for Rotarianism? Maybe so.

This is a revealing development on two levels. The first is the fading cachet of Presbyterianism itself as a religious and theological brand. Time was in the not so distant past when saying you were Presbyterian was to indicate that you were part of a broad swath of American Protestantism that was respectable, reliable, dignified, and even refined. Granted, such cultural Presbyterianism was too much bound up with the mainstream Protestant project of aiding and abetting the American way as the Protestant way. Still, being Presbyterian was desirable because it connoted a certain seriousness of purpose – like DuPont or IBM.

For conservatives outside the mainline, being Presbyterian said less about being from the right social circles and more about identifying with the Reformation and its wonder-working powers in reshaping western civilization. To be Presbyterian was to draw a connection to John Calvin and John Knox, and to place yourself within a certain trajectory of European history and the West’s heritage. To be sure, Presbyterianism was more than history or cultural significance, but it suggested a faith and worship that was older, weightier, and more profound than fundamentalism or dispensationalism.

But Presbyterianism no longer has such cultural resonance. The networkers seem to have calculated that they have less to lose by abandoning an older identity for a new constellation of congregations orbiting around a single congregation, visionary pastor, or – better yet – celebrity preacher.

The second oddity about the current Presbyterian penchant for networking is how little consideration its advocates seem to give to the ephemeral character of these ties. Say what you will about denominations, they last in ways that networks do not. Does anyone remember the Moral Majority? How about the Evangelical Alliance? So why will Acts 29 survive the career of Mark Driscoll or Redeemer City to City outlive Tim Keller? Once Jack Miller, the founder of one of Presbyterianism’s original networks, the New Life phenomenon, New Life Presbyterian congregations have persisted but the buzz no longer fizzes. So if you are a congregation looking for a larger set of associations, you may think that Acts 29 is a solid bet. But will you actually receive any of the care and oversight that a Presbyterian denomination provides through its – yes dull – but effective structures?

Of course, the more important question is whether God has ordained networks to feed his flock. Granted, some will likely argue that denominations have no such divine imprimatur. But because Presbyterian denominations do have sessions, presbyteries, and assemblies, they are actually far more biblical than any network of churches, no matter how Calvinistic its celebrity leader or creative its congregations’ logos.

Correction: The Evangelical Presbyterian Church claims approximately 115,000 members. (Thanks to one of our scrupulous readers.)

38 thoughts on “Where Have All the Presbyterians Gone? They Joined Networks”

  1. Pingback: Tweets that mention Where Have All the Presbyterians Gone? They Joined Networks -- Topsy.com

  2. This may have been answered in a previous post, but how is it that a church in the PCA can plant another church which does not become part of the PCA?

    Like

  3. “Time was in the not so distant past when saying you were Presbyterian was to indicate that you were part of a broad swath of American Protestantism that was respectable, reliable, dignified, and even refined.”

    Isn’t that part of the long road that led up to the present moment of decline?

    Like

  4. Darryl,

    I [have been a member of Spanish River Church for nearly five years. David Nicholas was my senior pastor until 2009. He stepped down after 42 years to start the The Church Planting Network. Over the years I have had more and more issues with this venture. Some of our elders are on TCPN’s board. I have asked our elders why we support the planting of non-PCA churches. Essentially, their answer is that they care about the gospel going forth, not strict formalism or confessional fidelity. The only requirement to plant a church through TCPN and our church is as follows: Reformed (though there is no definition of what this entails); plurality of male elders; and the preaching of Bad News/Good News (which is SRC’s way of presenting the gospel).

    I would have to disagree with some of your post. You are giving David Nicholas more credit than he deserves. Spanish River Church may enjoy claiming that we are responsible for Driscoll and Keller, but our elders have no idea what Keller and Driscoll are doing or what they believe. From a blogging perspective, it may be informative to write about this issue, but from a member of the church, living in Boca Raton, FL, it is a very difficult issue which none of my elders understand. It is a tough fight to get the elders to care about the PCA denomination, our confessions and creeds, and many other Presbyterian doctrines. It is also my understanding that TCPN is now directly under Spanish River Church now that David Nicholas has passed away. Now, the churches will look slightly different, and maybe slightly more Presbyterian, because particularization requires greater elder accountability.

    Like

  5. Pingback: Where Have All the Presbyterians Gone? They Joined Networks – (via Old Life) « Pilgrimage to Geneva

  6. Great post Dr. Hart.

    I agree once these Cult of Personality Preachers come and go, so will their Mega Church/Multi Site Empires, as their people seek after the Newer and better thing.

    Did you happen to see the Gospel Coalition clip where Driscoll and Missional/Emerging Church buddy ganged up Mark Dever? Practically accusing Mark of being selfish because he only has one service and doesn’t Multi site. Scoffing at the idea of the Biblical Role of the Pastor, of someone who knows and feeds his sheep.

    It was great meeting you @ WS-Cal’s Christianity & Liberalism Revisited Conference

    God Bless
    Joe

    Like

  7. I fount it interesting to read your post and then listen to this recent podcast by Tim Challies and David Murry where they interview a leader with Ligonier Ministries. About 3/4 of the way through he begins sharing about the transition plans and the future of that ministry after Dr. Sproul departs the scene. He also talks about the significance of the undergraduate academy they are starting. Isn’t Piper starting a school as well? It’s interesting to hear Murry speak of the “anxiety” of knowing that Dr. Sproul is aging. I know Ligonier does not do church planting but would your concerns apply equally to organizations like them? Also, when will the Old Life Theological Academy open? Inquiring minds want to know.

    Like

  8. Lutherans know they are Lutherans. Presbyterians just think they are evangelicals. How do we recover or instill a distinct identity within Presbyterianism?

    Like

  9. “…Lutherans know they are Lutherans…” ??? Does this statement include the ELCA? Or about 50% of the LCMS? I think not. The ELCA fits right in with the PCUSA in this regard and half the LCMS congregations identify more with a Presby borderline (e.g., CRC) than they do with confessional Lutherans.

    Like

  10. George, in response to your “???,” it is possible my experience is not representative. I have some familiarity with Midwest OPC and PCA churches, and liberal churches really aren’t even on my radar. I have seen a number of members from those churches leave for non-Presbyterian churches with nary a wrinkle of thought about it. I don’t recall any long-term Lutherans moving in the other direction.

    Are you Lutheran, George? If so, I would be interested in your analysis of why, as you imply, Lutherans so easily leave Lutheranism.

    Like

  11. “Michael,” maybe by simply working within (and submitting to) the ecclesiastical structures God has ordained to feed his flock. I know, not as inspiring as cobbling together a gaggle of celebrity pastors and gospel networks, but I think that’s the point.

    Like

  13. Eureka, Zrimmer! Should we “try harder,” too?

    The question regards ways of pastoring, preaching, teaching, etc., in order that a given flock will grow to value what is distinctively Presbyterian.

    Like

  14. Michael – the simple answer to why “Lutheranism leave Lutheranism” (which I assume to mean forsake their confessional roots, adopt a low view of scripture, and foster a vastly inclusive and methobapticostal worship environment)) is, in a word, Pietism. They have turned their backs on the Reformation in favor of social justice, a pursuit of everything from gay rights to concerns about global warming, things that one would normally associate with secular mandates, not the church. So if you want to be attractive to the world and want to adopt a secular world-view you have to act like the world does – and they do, especially the ELCA.

    I used to be Lutheran but now belong to one of those independent congregations (though not a mega-church in any sense) that is a bit mixed, but is heavily influenced by Reformed thought. I did not care much for the Lutheran view of baptismal regeneration (which is similar to FV), was not convinced that Luther himself believed or taught it, and had problems with their idea of the bodily presence in the Lord’s Supper.

    Like

  15. Zrim & Michael,

    I’m breaking my vow of silence on commenting on a new thread (forgive me?), but I may have some helpful input. I can’t speak on the ELCA, but I can give you some input on the LCMS.

    One of the major things that helped cause our synod divisions was a past synod President. Prior to his several terms in office, he was the district President of Texas. He got into the church growth movement and led a number of Texas churches into joining the Willow Creek Association and changed the shape of Lutheranism in much of Texas. Then as President, he also invited into our midst the Saddleback church, emergent church gurus, and other ilk. He was turning us into worse than Dallas Theological Seminary style churches plus penalizing and routing out our confessional pastors and churches on a synod scale.

    Things came to a head when he canceled the radio program Issues Etc. Our confessional pastors and laity had been working to preserve Lutheranism, but this rallied even more people and we began to seriously fight back. We now have a new synod President who is strong confessional, incredible scholar, and a pastor’s pastor. He has his work cut out for him in bringing our synod together and back to our confessions. I have hope for good things ahead, but I also have a feeling we will need to be the church militant until Christ returns

    Like

  20. Michael, oh, too obvious? You want something more specific? Let’s pick up where Calvin left off trying to instill a distinctively Reformed identity: weekly communion.

    Like

  21. Dr. Hart,

    Here is the clip
    http://vimeo.com/13082622

    Not much of brawl though, Mark Dever got tag teamed here.. I wished Dever would have put up a better fight here. Maybe the Grudge Match should be Dr(s) Hart & Clark VS Driscoll & McDonald. I would PPV that.

    God Bless
    Joe

    Like

  22. DGH: Great post. Informative, I did not know the geneology of the various networks.

    One question this raises, a real $64.00 question: how is it that there are apparently large swaths of the PCA that care so little about the confessional nature and standards of the PCA?

    Do you think the “broadening church” effect or trajectory is speeding up or compressing? It took 200 years for the “broadening church effect” to reach that crucial point (an event horizon) of 1929.* Now it seems to be operating at much faster pace.

    * It’s handy to find a nice 200-year span from 1729 to 1929, eh? Different historians will peg the dates a little differently. The Confessional revision of 1903 was crucial, and perhaps the genesis of the OPC in 1936 is better event that the reorg of PTS/founding of WTS.

    -=Cris=-

    Like

  23. Cris,

    I think the answer is that large parts of the PCA, from the beginning, never cared about confessions in the sense that DGH is talking about. The PCA has always been more bent towards the “evangelical” sphere. There are certainly elements of both “old school” and “new school” but the denomination has favored many new school approaches especially compared to the OPC. The PCA’s origins lay not so much with confessional problems (remember the PCUS’s official documents were still rather orthodox) but with related theological and social issues, particularly those taking place in the South during the 1960/1970’s.

    Ryan- glad to know there are some others that care about the confessions and Presbyterianism in the south FL section of the PCA. I’m at Granada Pres in Coral Gables.

    Like

  24. The more confessional you become the more you butt heads with the powers that be in paticular denominations. I agree with what Lily said about the LCMS. My Pastor is very confessional, comes from a long line of Lutheran Pastors in his family heritage and is hopeful for what Harrison is trying to do in the LCMS. Although he admits that the Ablaze types (the former LCMS presidents program) have most of the bigger LCMS congregations where a lot of the money in the denomination comes from. So, it seems it is very difficult to get around the beaurocratic struggles no matter what the situation in any denomination. It is possible but takes some strong and wise leadership to pull it off. The battle gets wearisome and wears people out.

    Harrison is backing away from the celebrity status Pastor among other positive things in the beaurocratic realm according to my Pastor. He is trying to decentralize the denomination and give more leeway to the local congregations.

    Like

  25. George,

    My head spins when I try to figure out the differences between the Lutherans and Reformed in regards to the sacraments and how they came to their positions from historical theology, biblical theology, dogmatics and systematic theology. You also have to add a bit of philosophical backround and reflection to the debate. I have kind of thrown in the white flag and will let the true theologians keep the debate going. I am content with the liturgy and service my Pastor adheres to, ie., that it is faithful to the scriptures and confessional standards. Whether the Holy Spirit brings us into the heavenly realm where Christ is seated or whether Christ is among us here on earth when we take communion is one of those questions which I think is beyond our limited intellects. All that I know is that my assurance of forgiveness is strong when I partake of the Supper in the local Church I attend. And when I look back on my Baptism in fatih, my faith in what Christ did for me is always strengthened.

    Craig Parton, in his book The Defense Never Rests had this to say about Lutheran theology:
    “Thus we see that at its center Luther’s theology is cross-centered, objective, and verifiable in the most critical sense of the word. Indeed, in his historic confrontation at the Diet of Worms Luther staked his very life on the objectivity of the Word of God and its objective sense. Luther was not against apologetics-he was, though, a student of Holy Writ who worked with the Scriptures inductively, refusing to impose from the top down interpretations that appeared ligical and consistent. This was particularly evident at the Marburg Colloquy in Luther’s arguments with Zwingli (and later the Calvinists), beginning with the philosophical principle finitum non capax infiniti (the finite is not capable of the infinite), insisted that the real presence of Christ in the sacrament of Holy Communion was a logical impossibility. That is, a finite element such as bread could not contain God. Luther, who had already stated at the Diet of Worms that his conscience was captive to the Word of God, insisted on the plain, literal sense of the text where Jesus says, ‘This is my body,’ even though in so doing Scripture presents a logical dilemma: finitum est capax infinity (the finite is capable of the infinite). Luther’s sacramental theology was built from the bottom up. It is a biblical theology based on an inductive methodology that, as John Warwick Montgomery has plainly shown, planted the seed for the blossoming of scientific inquiry during the Reformation and thereafter…………Luther would not let human reason think it could save itself by speculations or by rational deductions or philosophizing. But God gave us a reason that remains capable of determining if events in history really occurred. Believer and unbeliever can determine facts.”

    The debate between the Lutherans and Calvinists about the sacraments may be insolvable this side of the life and world to come.

    Like

  26. Well, you might be losing a lot of Presbyterians to the networks, but the networks are about to loose one of their to old school Presbyterianism. I’m getting the covenant of grace like I haven’t when I studied it in the past. Actually, I never really studied it with an open mind since I just outright dismissed the idea that infant baptism could even be a biblical idea…

    Like

  27. Watch out, DJ, paedobaptism is the first step to the dark side. Next you’ll be claiming the church ought not baptize political views (by sprinkling or immersion).

    Like

  28. Zrim:
    you know it’s funny. I have been an inconsistent dude for a long time. For the most part, I am amill, 2k, and I certainly am a 5-point calvinist. I am just now starting to see how they “fit” and are vitally connected to each other. I just don’t know if I would be able to explain it properly to someone at t his point! My mind is jumbled from weighing all the arguments that I have wrestled with this past month. I have one last book to read (3 views on baptism with Ferguson and Ware). And I am meeting with a local OPC pastor to ask him some questions on stuff I still don’t quite get. But those questions are becoming fewer and fewer!

    Like

  30. DJ: FWIW, it took me about 7 years to accept paedobaptism.

    Murray’s Christian Baptism, ch. 3, on the nature of the church, pushed me over the edge.

    Like

  31. Thanks for the link to Riddlebarger’s info on the sacraments! I was unaware. I read the article on “how many points” back when it was posted at the Riddleblog. That’s the first time I realized it was historically inaccurate for me to call myself “Reformed”.

    Like

  32. It would be interesting to research what may have occurred a few years ago when Driscoll was able to wrest control of Acts29 from David Nicholas without Nicholas seemingly unaware of what was going on. Or did Driscoll simply show up and declare, “I’m the president now!” and no one bothered to challenge him? (Which is what appears is happening again, perhaps to stop a threatened exodus of churches from the network after recent revelations of mistreatment of members at his own church.)
    http://www.acts29network.org/acts-29-blog/dear-acts-29-members

    Like

  35. The “Network” concept is more appropriate to congregations that operate autonomously. By definition Presbyterians are not in autonomous congregations, they are in congregations that are accountable to a larger body — a Presbytery. This is healthy accountability. How much accountability do these “Networks” entail?

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.