Comments on Wineskins

Comments on "New Wineskins" -- 2004

Visitors comment on Gene TeSelle's discussion of a proposal being advanced by some evangelical Presbyterians, under the title of "New Wineskins," for some radical changes in the way the Presbyterian Church is structured, and the way it operates. [9-29-04]

First from the Rev. Tom Tyndal, a pastor in Tennessee:

My comments really are directed to Gene TeSelle, author of the article:

Friend Gene, thanks for the reflection on this "New Wineskins" proposal, or at least your offerings on how it might play out. I found your observations about trying to redo the church under some forms of how it seems now, to probably be accurate. My only problem is that most of this, your observations and the "Wineskins" proposal as well does not seem very hopeful, promoting growth or outreach to our increasingly un-churched but spiritually hungry culture.

All this conversation sounds like a bunch of 60 year old white folk (my 60^th birthday comes in five months) trying to reinvent the church for ourselves. Since I spend some time running around with, and now working with, 30 year olds, they speak a different language and picture of the church they commit to. Their church is more media driven……Wi-Fi, Powerpoint, video clips, drama, humor-laden than most PCUSA churches can tolerate. They also resource from the secular and sacred, particularly in music. Theological education comes more from seminars, books and weekend retreats than three year curriculums (curriculi?). They do groups, short term commitments like a Habitat House or mission trips, and three year eldership/deaconate terms, coats and ties, liturgy that drones (conservative or liberal) or endless wranglings about policies, procedures and manuals leaves them cold. Permission giving to many of them means "try it, try it again, if it crashes, start over, upgrade or keep after a vision 'til you get it right…." not exactly the stuff of Book of Order dictates. They find lots of room for innovation, while strangely wanting a return to some of the ancient forms such as more candles, colors and symbols. Strangely, such younger generations haven't quite figured out how to deal with parity of male/ female leadership, nor how to staff more effectively to retard the largely whites only churches emerging from such passions. Boards are smaller (five to seven folks, not "inclusive" which leads to 25 member boards), short-term teams of three often replace never ending committees/meetings. How do those energies fit with "New Wineskins" proposals? I am really not sure.

At times I see us as redoing the Oldsmobile, now dead as a carmaker after pioneering a 100 year history. Their cars got better, but nobody cared, and their name meant nothing (my dad sold Oldsmobiles in the 1950's when they knew who they were). There is a deep unrest, even anger, among the 20, 30 and even 40 year olds. Church is boring, not preserving. Church is still too concerned with money for buildings, not mission. And church is filled with too much "low grade belly-aching" to quote the late Dr. Frank Harrington who pastored Peachtree Presbyterian Church.

While I am fascinated by your reflections, I am more worried that church is starting to look like and sound like you and me, an aging entity trying to reinvent itself while there are much more attractive versions of church "out there" that we rebuff, ignore or just see as not very viable. And our children---and soon grandchildren?---are leaving the PCUSA in droves, at times for other churches, but also for the beach, golf, the Internet or a good book. Perhaps the church to reach them has yet to be formed, dreamed or implemented.

Tom Tyndall
Cross Point Community Church
Nashville, Tennessee

~~~~~~~

Mike Bailey compares the proposal with the Southern Baptist system

There is nothing new in the "new wineskins" proposal. I do not see any significant difference in this proposal and the organization of say the Southern Baptist Convention. This proposal is many things to many people but there are two things it is not. It is not reformed and it is certainly not Presbyterian.

Even among the Southern Baptists, where this has always been the operational model it has done nothing to stem the conflicts within congregations and within the denomination. The new wineskins model is not any better and in many ways much worse than the form which it would replace.

Mike Bailey
Corinth Presbyterian Church (PCUSA)

~~~~~~~

Another comment on the "new wineskins" discussion [9-30-04]

Ok, I realize I am new to the PCUSA but it seems to me that those who are evangelical have many conservative Presbyterian options available to them. Why not join the EPC or PCA or ARP? It is not that I WANT them to leave but if they are that unhappy with the PCUSA there are many alternatives available. But, like I said I am new.

Jack A. Harris Jr.
Williamsburg, VA

~~~~~~~

Now please let us hear from you!
Just send a note to add to the conversation about a very interesting proposal for change in the PC(USA).