To me, the “harm” seems to be that it maintains the status quo. (Personally, I’d like to see what I’d deem “progres” in this area, though I’m willing to move slowly enough to keep the majority of the denomination intact.)

The GA this year affirmed chastity for the ordained outside of marriage between a man and a woman. This is troubling to me, of course, but why are conservative Presbyterians leaving over this?

I don’t see you making the connection, but Presbyterian megachurches aren’t all conservative. For others who are reading, the largest church in our presbytery (with around 4500 members) isn’t conservative, and the largest in the presbytery I came from isn’t either (Fourth Church Chicago). But for those that are, taking a strong stand on the ethical issues that they think are important would be essential for their membership, I’d guess.

The other thing about the larger presbyterian churches is that they tend (note that this is a stereotype, so there are some that break the rule) to be less denomination/presbytery oriented. They tend to do things their own way a lot. Perhaps this feeds the initative…

The two co-moderators of the NWI and the “Executive Director” are all pastors from very large churches, over 1,000 members. Their allegiance is bound to be first and foremost with their evangelical church-growth colleagues, for whom “taking a stand” on a moral issue like sexuality is of tantamount and defining importance. My guess is that most of the churches who have signed on to the NWI are or aspire to be megachurches.

What do you think of that?