The possibility of a "gracious separation" in the Presbyterian Church (USA) was a much-discussed topic at the national conference of the Presbyterian Coalition in Portland, OR, in October 2003.

It continues to be a matter of concern on the part of some conservative Presbyterians.  Most recently it was taken to Washington Presbytery of Washington, Pennsylvania, as a proposed overture to the General Assembly.

The Presbytery rejected the proposal. 

By a vote of 26 in favor to 76 opposed, the Presbytery of Washington, in western Pennsylvania, rejected the proposal that has been put forward by a number of conservative groups in the PC(USA). [The vote count comes from the Washington County [PA] Observer-Reporter; the Layman Online reports a vote of 28 in favor.]

The Rev. L. Rus Howard, pastor of Peters Creek United Presbyterian Church, introduced the motion calling for an overture on gracious separation. The Rev. Mr. Hubbard gained national attention in October of 2002 when he, with four other Presbyterian ministers, taped a "Call to Confession and Repentance" on a wall of the Presbyterian Center in Louisville, charging that the PC(USA) is "decaying and dying in the belly of the beast" and is "irretrievably apostate under current management." The Peters Creek church is a member of the "Confessing Church" movement.

We received this note raising a question about our January 20^th report on the action of Washington Presbytery in rejecting a proposed overture on "gracious separation."

[posted 1-21-04]

Hi, Doug -

In your note on "gracious separation" on the Witherspoon Society website today (1/20), you said, "By a vote of 26 in favor to 76 opposed, the Presbytery of Washington, in western Pennsylvania, rejected the proposal that has been put forward by a number of conservative groups in the PC(USA)." What are those groups? I only know of individuals who have been putting it forward, at least, that's all I'm sure of.

Thanks--

Debbie Berkley

A response from your WebWeaver:

Ms. Berkley raises a fair question here, and indeed there do not seem to be any formal organizational sponsors of the "gracious separation" idea. But our report referred to "groups" supporting the "gracious separation" idea, and not any particular organizations.

And from what we observed at the Presbyterian Coalition conference in October, 2003, and in numerous reports before and since then, the movement seems to be supported strongly by a number of individuals with clear links to a number of conservative groups.

Just a few examples:

At the Coalition gathering the Rev. Rick Wolling, pastor of Beverly Heights Presbyterian Church in Pittsburgh, concluded his portion of the morning's survey of views on separation, "I used to think it would be disobedient and unfaithful to leave. Now I think it would be disobedient and unfaithful to stay." Among the three people who stood to applaud was the Rev. Parker Williamson, chief executive officer of the Presbyterian Lay Committee and editor in chief of its publications.

The Presbyterian Layman and the Layman Online have given strong and (at least in my reading) sympathetic coverage to the gracious separation idea, including the publication of a summary of its main points. The main creator and proponent of the idea has been Mr. Robert L. Howard, former chair of the Lay Committee and still a member of its board.

A newer and much less formal group, calling itself New Wineskins, was represented at the Coalition gathering by the Rev. David Henderson, pastor of Covenant Presbyterian Church in West Lafayette, Indiana, the Rev. Doug Pratt, Co--Moderator of the Presbyterian Coalition, and others. They presented their proposal for an "emerging denomi-network of the future," which looked a lot like a new kind of shadow denomination which would ultimately provide an alternative to the PCUSA - an alternative that could evolve into a new church, faithful in doctrine and morality, when the present church seems to them headed for apostasy.

Henderson expressed appreciation for the way Bob Howard has influenced his thinking, and took note that many other groups in the Coalition are refusing to support the move for separation.

So ... have organizations supported this idea? Nope. Have some very important leaders from at least one of those organizations supported the idea? I'll leave that for you to decide.

If you'd like to add your comments to the conversation, please send a note!