The Problems Faced By Small New Wineskins Churches
(And Others Who Would Like To Be) in the PC(USA)

Michael R. “Mac” McCarty

As more large and middle-sized churches begin to progress toward dismissal or disaffiliate from the PC(USA), some small congregations find that they are effectively denied relief by the entrenched bureaucracy. These small churches, with equally small working budgets, have members who would be quite happy to become part of a presbyterian Church which is evangelical, conservative, and faithful to the Scriptures, but they cannot afford to pay a “ransom” that is being demanded by the PC(USA)and its presbyteries.

It is a sad fact of life that many presbyteries, cash-strapped themselves, have made the decision that they cannot afford to litigate over property against larger churches. Many such presbyteries have initially relied on the promises of the Louisville Papers that the so-called trust provision is an iron-clad guarantee of victory, only to discover that the iron has turned to rust. Their local counsel advise them that the battle over property is anything but a sure win and push for settlement. Faced with dwindling bank accounts and mounting legal bills of their own, they negotiate deals for dismissal, either with or without a financial payment.

But this scenario applies only to those churches that have the financial wherewithal to engage in a potentially protracted legal battle. What of the smaller churches? What are their options?

IN GENERAL

That being said, we have heard from a number of smaller churches whose members would be quite happy to become part of a presbyterian Church which is evangelical, conservative, and faithful to the Scriptures. They are deterred from even asking their presbyteries by the concern that the presbytery will demand a hefty “ransom” before the congregation will be dismissed.

First and foremost: Remember, it is not an “either-or” proposition. Your church can remain in the PC(USA) but participate in New Wineskins in a more positive way, advancing the cause of presbyterian witness while also putting the PC(USA) on notice that you are seriously looking for an opportunity to adopt a conservative alternative.

At the same time, those of us in the settlement business know that trials are notoriously risky. Every time I am involved in a civil trial, the judge frequently reminds the lawyers on both sides of the case that settlement for an agreed-upon figure will be more palatable (to at least one side) than a all or nothing judgment from the court. When the settlement figure is reasonable, a lawyer is expected and required to bring it to his or her client with a recommendation.

THE TWO FAITHFUL OPTIONS

The Strategy team of the New Wineskins Association of Churches reported two equally faithful options for churches currently voluntarily affiliated with the PC(USA).

In this report, we set out a strategy for achieving a new thing, and for engaging in and effecting a realignment that fosters and nurtures that vision. The goal is to further the Great Ends of the Church, and not to undermine, but to uphold our life together as members of the Body of Christ.

Some of us will be called to follow The Plan . . . that leads to new relationships with brothers and sisters in Christ who are in a different place. Those who follow this path will leave their parent’s home and join with others to discover new ways to carry out the Great Commission.

Others may be called to stay where they are and be a prophetic witness to what has been our traditional home. Those who follow this path will continue to strive to reform, renew and repair the old homestead so that it can once again be a vibrant and welcoming lodging for those who are lost and hungry for the Word.
That being said, we implore all to whom this report shall come: there must be a new thing, wherever it may occur. To simply stand fast and relax in the status quo is to agree that no change is necessary. Is such a course a faithful response to the moment in time in which we find ourselves? We emphatically respond, “No!”

We believe there are two faithful options for evangelicals to follow:

● To realign with an evangelical, Reformed body that is more faithful to Christ, obedient to Scripture and seeks a missionally-focused partnership with us than is the PC(USA); or
● To stay in place within the PC(USA), while working for the reformation and renewal of that part of the Body of Christ if so led by the Holy Spirit.

A Time For Every Purpose Under Heaven, at 15-16 (NWAC Strategy Team, 2007)

FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO LEAVE THE PC(USA) BUT THINK THEY CAN’T

For those ultimately called to stay and work for reformation of the PC(USA), the problems are primarily spiritual. But for those who are called by God to leave the PC(USA) and to move to a new place, the problems are often practical—and usually financial. There are still a number of options for those, in the words of one recent writer, “whose hearts are with the EPC while their property is with the PCUSA and those who would rather entrust their money to the missions and evangelism programs and outreach of the EPC than to the political machinations of the PCUSA.”

Endorse the New Wineskins Initiative and Constitution
July 2007 saw a monumental historical event: the creation of the New Wineskins Transitional Non-Geographic Presbytery of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (hereinafter, “NWEPC”). This new presbytery provided a safe harbor for congregations leaving the PC(USA).

Unfortunately, it seems that creation of NWEPC has fostered a belief that the New Wineskins Initiative no longer exists. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The New Wineskins Initiative is still alive and is now established in the New Wineskins Association of Churches. Its Vision Statement states that:

We envision a connectional structure that . . .
● Serves the ministry and mission of the local congregation
● Is united by a mutual commitment to a broadly evangelical and biblical theology
● Fosters relational networks based on ministry context as well as regional proximity
● Provides accountability, support, and discipline in a healthy, balanced, biblical way
● Is flexible and responsive to changing needs and cultural dynamics
● Supports and encourages partnerships for cooperative mission between congregations
● Encourages partnerships for ministry and mission with Christians of other denominations and parachurch ministries
● Draws upon proven programs, curricula, and other resources available from across the broader body of Christ
● Functions like a mission agency more than a regulatory agency

Membership in the New Wineskins Association of Churches is open to PC(USA) congregations, subject only to affirmation of the New Wineskins vision statement, The Essential Tenets of the Reformed Faith and the Ethical Imperatives by their Session. The advantage of NWAC membership to the small church is that it gains access to ministry and support networks, except that it does not participate directly in NWEPC business, e.g., ordinations, calls to ministry, and so forth.

Re-Direct Per Capita

Any church that is seriously considering departing from the PC(USA) ought to also seriously consider re-directing its payment of per capita to the New Wineskins Association of Churches. First, if it ready to go, it has probably already determined that the PC(USA) is not faithfully using the funds given to it. Moreover, it forecloses the presbytery from arguing that it expected the funds. By re-directing per-capita to a truly Biblical and evangelical branch of the Presbyterian Church a congregation’s protest changes from a negative (”with-holding funds”) to a positive (support for a mission in which it believes)

Any session can stop paying per capita at any time for any reason. See Session, Central Church v. Pby of Long Island, Remedial Case 204-5, (Minutes, 1992, p. 179) (“Presbytery may not punish, directly or indirectly, a church whose session determines the distribution of the church’s benevolences [including per capita] in a way contrary to the presbytery’s approved policy.”) See also, Johnston, et al. v. Heartland Presbytery, Remedial Case 217-2 (2004).

As is obvious from many of the on-going discussions between presbyteries and churches seeking dismissal¹, the presbyteries see these departures as a means for filling their coffers. Some have taken the position that the ransom demanded is necessary to make up for lost per capita.

The problem for the churches is that they have, indeed, been paying per capita. The greater problem for the presbyteries is that they have no expectation that per capita will be paid. That issue is, posed in two ways.

First, some presbyteries, which are still receiving per capita from the departing church, ask for a commitment of continued financial support to make up for “lost” future per capita. They argue that they have been relying on the expectation of those payments and they ought not have to trim their budgets at the last minute. Of all the arguments in favor of a settlement, this one has the most, albeit still weak, emotional and philosophical appeal.

Second, some presbyteries may seek to recover “past due,” i.e., unpaid past per capita. The rule in Central Church and Johnston makes it clear that this argument is a loser. If the session is under no obligation to pay per capita, it cannot be “past due.” The presbytery had no expectation that it would ever get a dime and has no way to enforce collection.

As the connections important to some presbyteries—money and dirt, bricks and mortar—are severed, the presbytery may be less inclined to refuse dismissal.

There Is Strength In Numbers

Another advantage of NWAC membership to a small PC(USA) church is that it may discover a number of similarly associated churches in its own presbytery. The ability of two or three churches to ally themselves in dealing with a presbytery has been proven. For instance, if the churches are from two or three different counties, the presbytery may decide that it cannot afford litigation. The churches might also find that where the legal costs to a single congregation of separating from the PC(USA) are prohibitive, a joint representation may be negotiated with one attorney who might offer savings that make negotiation with the presbytery affordable.

A Mortgage Is Not Necessarily A Bad Thing

For churches that have mortgages and an intransigent presbytery, the fact that members may transfer to another church or denomination at will can be a powerful tool. For example, consider a sixty-member congregation whose church corporation has a $50,000 mortgage. It is able to make payments and pay the other bills. They know that the vote to request dismissal will pass 58-2, but presbytery will not even consider dismissal with property.

The presbytery may want to rethink its position if all 58 members announce that they will leave for a new place or places and the pastor renounces jurisdiction. Presbyteries love unencumbered property (no mortgage) because it is a cash source. If the bank is going to foreclose and sell the property, the presbytery has lost a congregation, lost good will with some other members of the presbytery, and has nothing to show for it. In such a case, the presbytery may rethink its position.

Do Not Be Afraid To Talk To Us

There are now a substantial number of churches that have addressed the very problems facing churches—large or small—who want to leave the PC(USA). NWAC has access to pastors, elders, and attorneys familiar with these issues. While it cannot provide legal representation to small churches there are people who will listen to specific questions. Call us—working together, we can support each other in these most interesting times.

¹But definitely not all! The Presbytery of Mississippi, the Presbytery of South Louisiana, and Muskingum Valley Presbytery have all recently taken a very pastoral and Scripturally correct position that there is but one Church and charging exit fees for transfer within the Church is not appropriate. What a wonderful witness—and one that I hope will be employed by many more presbyteries.

This entry was posted on Friday, December 7th, 2007 at 9:05 am and is filed under New Wineskins. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.