Joel St Clair @joel_stclair

@warne @BaldlyObserving *Almost* anything for you, Dan. 😀

@CAHutch1990 @AdrielTweets Thanks so much for your encouragement to the committee @CAHutch1990! It has been a joy to work alongside such wonderful, thoughtful leaders in these labors.

@thebocollins AMR was there . . . here's some reflections: a4mr.org/after-the-gene…

"Golf is a worrier’s game, inward, concentrated, a matter of inches, invented by the same people who gave us Presbyterianism." - Robert Haas

The Directory for Worship and the Rising Generations I've previously discussed how I think the PCA needs to embrace the heritage of its tradition while making it accessible and legible to the rising generations, many of whom are unchurched or nondenominational. The Directory for Worship being proposed at the upcoming #PCAGA is a great example of this. It offers clear guidance to the courts of the church while also setting standards and expectations for those who are new to the tradition. It explains the “why” behind the “what,” offering a succinct but compelling vision of Reformed worship. I think this will be particularly useful for the rising generations. Our church has many young people who are new to Presbyterianism. They come before they are convinced, so they bring many questions about the what’s and why’s of our tradition, especially around worship. I eagerly anticipate using this directory as a resource. I am grateful for the AIC and pray we receive and adopt its work in full.

Harrison Ford @rhford123

3 months ago

On the Potential and Pitfalls of Presbymaxxing One theory of how the PCA can reach Gen Z and Gen Alpha is to be as Presbyterian as possible. Not just in theology and practice, but in attitude and aesthetic. The logic is this: young people have been burned by liquid modernity

6 5 44 11K 13

A Directory with a Smile: Why the PCA Should Welcome the Revised Directory for Worship For more than fifty years, the Presbyterian Church in America has lived with a curious arrangement. We have a Book of Church Order made up of three parts: the Form of Government, the Rules of Discipline, and the Directory for Worship. Yet the Directory for Worship has largely remained in a secondary constitutional status. It has been “an approved guide” and “the mind of the Church agreeable to the Standards,” but not binding in all its parts. Several chapters have been granted full constitutional authority, but the whole Directory has not. That means that the central activity of the Church has not had the same constitutional clarity as our doctrine, order, and discipline. The Ad Interim Committee on Revisions to the Directory for Worship is bringing forward a proposal that seeks to address that long-standing gap. Their report describes the revised Directory as “a carefully framed proposal,” shaped through “study, discovery, discussion and principled compromise,” and unanimously submitted with the hope that it “will honor our Triune God and edify this church.” I want to convince you that we should match their spirit and approve their revisions as our new Directory for Worship. On a recent episode of @PolityMatters, we had the opportunity to interview three members of the committee: Nate Shurden @nateshurden, Joel St. Clair @joel_stclair, and Chad Van Dixhoorn. (Subscribe, so you don’t miss it.) What came through in the conversation was not merely that the committee had produced a constitutional proposal, but that they had labored to give the PCA something warm, biblical, useful, and pastoral. Committee Chairman Nate Shurden explained that a directory, in the Reformed and Presbyterian tradition, is not a prayer book. It does not give fixed liturgical forms or prescribe every word of a service. But neither is it a vague appeal to spontaneity. “A directory traditionally within the Reformed and Presbyterian world,” he said, “seeks to lay out biblical principles and foundations… identifying ordinary elements for worship, giving pastoral directions for how worship should be practiced and conducted so that worship is governed by the Word of God.” He went on to say that a directory “literally gives direction” and “helps to give wisdom, theologically and biblically and practically, so that our worship will be ordered and edifying.” That is a helpful way to think about this proposal. The revised Directory is not an attempt to make every PCA congregation look identical. It is not an effort to flatten the breadth of our denomination. The committee explicitly says that the chapters were written to be “readable” and to “reflect the breadth of our denomination’s practice.” It aims to provide constitutional guidance without unnecessary over-prescription. Chad Van Dixhoorn used a memorable image in the interview. A prayer book, he suggested, can be like walking into a furniture store and saying, “I’ll take one of those living rooms.” Everything is already arranged. A directory, by contrast, is more like “Home Depot” or “IKEA”—the pieces are there, but they must be assembled wisely. His point was not to make worship casual or improvised, but to emphasize the genius of the Presbyterian directory tradition: it gives real direction without binding consciences to fixed forms. That balance is one of the great strengths of the proposed revision. The report itself says the committee sought to avoid both “an overbearing prescription of particular forms” and “an unhelpful abandonment of Reformed principles.” In other words, the Directory aims to give the guidance ministers, elders, and members need while also recognizing “the large measure of liberty granted by Christ to His church.” This may be one of the most pastorally important features of the whole proposal. The PCA is not a small, culturally uniform denomination. We have church plants, historic congregations, urban churches, rural churches, campus churches, large churches, small churches, churches with very simple services, and churches with more developed liturgical patterns. A good directory must be able to speak faithfully to all of them. It must be clear enough to guide us and broad enough to serve us. Joel St. Clair made another important point in the interview. We should not imagine that the Directory is a dusty document for rare use. The Form of Government may come into view most obviously at session meetings, congregational meetings, or presbytery. The Rules of Discipline, though essential, are used in particular circumstances. But worship is every week. Joel said, “When you think about the elements that are in the directory, that’s every week. That’s also during the week in family worship. There are things that cover the whole of life.” His hope was that the Directory would help every member of the church say, “This is Reformed worship. This is what this looks like.” That is exactly right. A good Directory for Worship should not merely settle debates; it should teach the church how to delight in the worship of God. And this is where the revised Directory is especially encouraging. The committee did not simply revise for technical precision. They sought to make the Directory devotional and explicitly theological. The report says that the current Directory sometimes gives instruction “with a frown” where the revised Directory seeks to communicate “with a smile.” It seeks to set biblical indicatives beneath biblical imperatives, highlighting the truths about God and His gospel that inform our worship. That positive tone appears immediately in the proposed Chapter 47: “Worship of the divine Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is the highest privilege of a Christian.” Corporate worship is described as the triune God summoning His church to meet with Him and be blessed by Him. Worship is not treated first as a burden, a performance, or a battleground, but as the great privilege of the redeemed. This is not softening Reformed worship. It is strengthening it. The regulative principle is not less beautiful because it is stated with warmth. Biblical order is not less biblical because it is presented as gift. Constitutional clarity is not less useful because it is devotional. Nate Shurden acknowledged that the proposed Directory is not perfect and that some may wish particular sections were tighter. But he offered a helpful image: the committee is trying “to build a fence around… a playground that hasn’t had one before.” The fence may not answer every future question. It may be refined over time. But, he said, “having a fence is better than the one that we don’t have right now.” That is a wise way to think about this moment. The question before the PCA is not whether every commissioner would have written every sentence exactly this way. The question is whether this proposal represents a faithful, useful, constitutional step forward for the church. The committee’s answer is yes. Nate said the members of the committee believe this Directory will have “a formatively positive impact upon the life and health and peace and purity of the PCA.” He described the committee’s work as marked by prayer, joy, disagreement, and brotherly unity, and expressed the hope that “the Spirit of the Living God would take that same spirit and spread it amongst us in the PCA.” Joel St. Clair closed with a similar hope. He said that some may be anxious that the Directory is either too open or too restrictive. But his encouragement was simple: read it. “Open up and read not only the introductory remarks but read through the actual Directory for Worship. I hope you’re ministered to. That was the result for all of us on the committee.” He then expressed the hope that the Assembly would “take a step forward and complete what’s been 50 years in the making.” A constitutional Directory for Worship will not solve every worship question in our denomination. It will not remove the need for wisdom, charity, or pastoral judgment. It will not make every congregation identical. But it can give us a common, biblical, confessional, and pastoral framework for the worship of the Triune God. The revised Directory gives the PCA an opportunity to say that the worship of our Triune God is not an afterthought. It is not merely local custom. It is not merely inherited habit. Worship is the highest privilege of the Christian and the church’s glad response to the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit. For that reason, we should receive this proposal with gratitude, read it carefully, discuss it charitably, and pray that the Lord will use it to honor His name and edify His church. pulpitmatters.com/p/a-directory-…

I understand the fear here (and who wants to be exhausted with a century of amendments!), but one encouragement: In the background section to the DFW it is noted that the preface to our BCO states that our Reformed faith is characterized by a doctrine and piety, government and discipline, and a *view of worship*. Guiding directories have historically been a key part of this view of worship. The intention with these was not to be overly prescriptive, but to supply genuinely helpful guidance. I believe that the DFW will be an encouragement to our churches insofar as it can be a tool for deeper reflection on and appreciation of worship among our body. The inevitability of future debates shouldn’t discourage us from a step in this direction, especially with its potential to edify our churches, and given the importance of serious reflection on worship in the Reformed tradition. In short, there may be items to discuss down the line (the document was submitted to the brothers with all humility, as we did not “now suppose that its work is perfect…”) but what we stand to gain by receiving it outweighs the potential for future amendments. If I may add as a personal note: the Lord really blessed our committee with a great sense unity and joy along the way! It was a real privilege to work with each member of the committee, and my respect for the brothers has only grown through the process. My only sadness is that our time together seems to be coming to an end! I’m thankful for them and thankful for all of the fathers and brothers who have been giving thoughtful feedback and encouragement since the DFW was shared. Pray for us!

Jerry Stutzman @jeretics

2 months ago

I like the DFW but I almost don’t want to vote for it because we are going to expend so much energy trying to “fix” it over the next one hundred years. #PCAGA

7 0 8 11K 0

@DZRishmawy @SEdburg Worthy of consideration.

In honor of the 90th Overture, a proposal: - 1st Overture by a Presbytery free - 2nd O (or if individual/session) = $1k deposit to AC. - If your O adopted - you get your money back. If not, AC applies money to the overall cost of GA. We debated this in Potomac this year.

@dfriederichsen Nah - I must of missed that unrelated topic.

@joaolucasluc Fair question. The goal is not to tip the scales any direction. My general view is that the court's time is valuable and the current incentives are misaligned. If a Presbytery believes an Overture is vital to the denomination - $1k deposit is too much money?

@Felker10 😁

@Felker10 Yes. And their money returned on any Overture that is adopted by OC. So maybe they get $16k back. Or maybe some of it goes to the AC for the cost of General Assembly.

@SEdburg Thanks Scott - I think this was one of the arguments leading to its defeat at our Presbytery. Is there a better $ amount that sets the right balance? What is the value of OC's time at a given Assembly?

Join Derek Radney, Steve Tipton, David Coffin, and Howie Donahoe for a roundtable discussion exploring the overtures and key questions facing the PCA ahead of the 2026 General Assembly. a4mr.substack.com/p/2026-overtur…

Just read through the proposed new Directory of Worship for the PCA. If it is made fully constitutional - which is what they propose - it will be subject to debate or amendment from those who will wish for it to be more directive/restrictive (choose your word). PCA 🧵 1/11

@justme6696 @irishpresby Yes sir - here you go: pcaga.org/wp-content/upl…

The current DPW for the PCA in BCO 50-2: "....should be done by the minister or some other person."

Sean McGowan @irishpresby

2 months ago

The meaning of “all are not permitted to read the word publicly to the congregation” from WLC 156 is defined in the divines own DPW. This, from the proposed PCA DFW departs from our Westminsterian tradition. And they want to make it constitutional.

8 2 45 9K 11

@derekradney @HowieDonahoe @brothernelson @SEdburg @_BenRatliff @a4mrofficial When AMR drops their video discussion - would be glad to see links in the description.