Current issues in the PCA

[rmwilliamsll]

I'm working on the last class, in two weeks, for the Sunday School series on the History of American Presbyterianism
(http://dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/hap0.html)

what i'm looking for is topics that are of importance in the PCA in particular, but in reformed churches in general.

here's my first pass:

four issues to look at:

federal vision
http://www.apologeticsgroup.org/
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonssource&sermonID=4604214913
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=42705192726
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=62905235459

league of the South
http://www.dixienet.org/
http://www.auburnavenue.org/

theonomy, reconstruction, dominion theology
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=22770
.....posted below
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/archive/index.php/t-23134

subscription
http://dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/hap2.html go down to the end with the PCA GA notes:
The six papers presented on Subscription at the PCA 29th G.A.

research
Steve Wilkins on racism and slavery
http://www.auburnavenue.org/PositionPapers/slaverysouthracism.htm

i know that the OPC appears to be splitting to the right

the split to the right in the OPC is:
http://www.erpchurch.org/
discussion on the split: http://www.acidink.org/200505archive001.asp


anyone interested in looking at these issues to make sense of them?


...

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

I'm working on the last class, in two weeks, for the Sunday School series on the History of American Presbyterianism
(http://dakotacom.net/%7Ermwillia/hap0.html)

what i'm looking for is topics that are of importance in the PCA in particular, but in reformed churches in general.


anyone interested in looking at these issues to make sense of them? ...

What are you wanting to know? I am in Louisiana. Steve Wilkins is part of our Presbytery. He has just been examined by Presbytery on the Federal Vision stuff and found to be ok on the matter.

Here is what the committee said and a link to Louisiana PCA website:
LA Presbytery Ad Hoc Committee on Federal Vision Theology Final Report and Recommendations

While we recognize important differences among the men associated with what has become known as Federal Vision Theology (FV), because of the common concerns shared by them, we are comfortable identifying FV as a theological movement which attempts to address various weaknesses within both contemporary Reformed traditions and the broader evangelical community

Some common doctrinal emphases: 1) sacramental efficacy, 2) the centrality of the visible Church, 3) the importance of a lived out faith to Christ, and 4) “real” covenantal union with Christ.

FV offers the following helpful criticisms:

1. FV challenges Scholastic tendencies within Reformed traditions.
2. FV challenges sectarianism, neglecting in practice the essential doctrine of the unity of the church, which is a great offense to God and of which most Reformed traditions and churches are guilty.
3. FV challenges Evangelicalism’s focusing exclusively on individualistic soteriology while neglecting the ecclesiological aspects of salvation.
4. FV challenges a low view of the sacraments, held in much of Evangelicalism.
5. FV challenges the way the doctrine of the Covenant of Works has been formulated and held in some Reformed camps.

We believe that theological development and inquiry is a needed task. Yet we are troubled by the nature of how this discussion has taken place.

* We believe that the proper place for theological development/inquiry of this nature is in the courts of the Church and not through the internet or in the pews.
* Problems with the way it has been communicated at times. Among some proponents, language has often been used in a way that confuses or incites rather than promotes understanding and peace.
* Likewise, while recognizing that we are to be ‘always reforming’ and should strive after theological progress, we are concerned about the reformulations of some theological corner pieces of the Reformed Faith (e.g., reworking of justification and imputation by some proponents).

We are also concerned at much of the reaction to what has become known as Federal Vision or Auburn Avenue Theology.

* Some critics have often read proponents’ writings in the worst possible light. If they had spoken to the proponents before publicly critiquing them, they would likely find much more common ground.

Our Presbytery has the following concerns:

1. Though we think the emphasis on the corporate nature of salvation is important in view of truncated contemporary emphases, such emphasis should exclude neither the individual application of salvation nor the individual’s vital, intimate relationship with Christ.
2. Any teaching on baptism as the visible (and invisible) means of union with Christ should not exclude the teaching that baptism assumes faith as the instrument of that union.
3. Any formulation of a doctrine of baptismal regeneration which makes an individual’s conversion and heart change absolute and infallible upon baptism is problematic.
4. A formulation of the doctrine of perseverance which states one who is elect (according to the WCF’s understanding of this term) can fall away from grace is problematic.
5. In teaching the eschatological and ecclesiological nature of justification, we should not exclude the Confession’s understanding of the individual’s justification as a forensic act based solely on Christ’s meritorious life and death.
6. We would like to note some differences (whether real or apparent) between some FV teachings and the Westminster Confession of Faith:

* Justification (WCF 11; SC 33; LC 70-73).
* Adoption, esp. regarding the certainty of perseverance (WCF 12; SC 34; LC 74)
* Perseverance (WCF 17.1; SC 36; LC 79-81)

As a guard against departures from the Confession, we would set the following boundaries of acceptability in four critical areas:

1. Baptismal efficacy: The Confessional understanding that baptism is a sacrament and, therefore, an effectual means of grace:
1. Allows for the view that God can regenerate at the moment of baptism according to the Confession’s understanding of regeneration as an individual’s change of heart from dead to living.
2. Allows for the view that at baptism God absolutely and really brings a person into the corporate people of God, that is the visible church.
3. Allows for the view that we are to consider everyone who is baptized and has not been excommunicated as regenerate.
4. Does not allow for the view that God always regenerates the individual after the manner of “a,” above.

2. Election:
1. The Bible uses the term ‘elect’ in different ways, including at times to refer to the corporate people of God. The Confession would allow for the term to be used in this way of those who belong to the corporate people of God. However, the Confession itself uses the term ‘elect’ to speak of only those who have been unchangeably chosen by God for eternal salvation.
2. The Confessional understanding of election does not allow for the view that a person can be “elect” and, later, “unelect” after the manner of the WCF’s understanding of the term.

3. Justification: The WCF
1. Calls for a view that Justification and sanctification are distinct but never separate.
2. Does not allow for a view of the individual’s justification which includes any works but Christ’s as an instrument in that person’s justification.
3. As with the term ‘elect’, the Bible also uses the term “justify” in broader ways than the Confession does, e.g., as in James 2:21-25. However the Confession itself uses the term ‘justification’ fundamentally to speak of the forensic declaration by God regarding a person when he or she initially trusts in Jesus with saving faith.

4. Perseverance/the nature of saving faith: The WCF
1. Calls for a view acknowledging that when someone passes from death to life (1 John 3:14) they cannot fall away or lose that faith, because saving faith is rooted in the gift that God gives rather than the works that we do.
2. Acknowledges the reality of apostasy, that a person can be a member of the visible church and fall away and thus loose the real benefits of belonging to God’s people, the real loss of external, Covenant blessings claimed through being a member of the visible church through baptism.
3. Does not accommodate a view that an individual can have a vital, internalized relationship with the Lord and lose it.

Auburn Avenue Theology Study Committee recommendations:

1. We strongly exhort all concerned to demonstrate patience and Christian charity in interacting with these issues and with one another.
2. Having thoroughly examined Rev. Steve Wilkins as to his views on these and other related issues, we find him to be within the bounds of the Confession at this time. However particular written expressions especially on the issue of baptism still have led to confusion, both on the part of those troubled by these writings as well as those who embrace what was written. We exhort him to clarify/reformulate his teachings to define them more precisely, especially as they relate to the Confession’s use of language and to take more care when communicating these things in the future. Nonetheless, we do believe that Rev. Steve Wilkins should be exonerated as to the charges and inquiries that our Presbytery has received about him, as he appears to be within the Confession and the System of doctrine contained therein.
3. That Rev. Steve Wilkins be publicly exonerated by Louisiana Presbytery, and declared to be faithful to the Confessional standards of the PCA.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

AFAIK we have the two Presbytery reports then,
http://www.gpts.edu/resources/pdf/LouisianaPresbyteryFVCommitteereport_criticsresponse.pdf
http://webzoom.freewebs.com/msvp/msvpadhoc.pdf

links list but not sympathetic to FV
http://www.fpcjackson.org/resources...vt Theology/modern_unbibl_challeng_ index.htm


Will this reach GA this year then?

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

AFAIK we have the two Presbytery reports then,
http://www.gpts.edu/resources/pdf/LouisianaPresbyteryFVCommitteereport_criticsresponse.pdf
http://webzoom.freewebs.com/msvp/msvpadhoc.pdf

links list but not sympathetic to FV
http://www.fpcjackson.org/resources/apologetics/Modern%20Unbib%20Chall%20to%20Covt%20Theology/modern_unbibl_challeng_%20index.htm


Will this reach GA this year then?

Steve Wilkins was examined by Louisiana Presbytery. One member of the committee was my for former pastor who was staunchly anti-FV. After close examination of Steve he signed off on the report.

I will read the links and get back to you on them. I have read a bunch of stuff on this issue from both sides and I think there is a lot of misunderstanding and lack of charity.

I would suggest reading Machen's Warring Children by John Frame.

Will the PCA divide over this? I don't know. I hope not, and I think it would be sin to let this further divide the Church. Someday we will all be in a denomination of one and each will claim to be the "Real" Reformed Church. God help us.

In Christ,
Kenith

 

[rmwilliamsll]

i'm working on my class for tomorrow on how presbyterians schism.
http://dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/hap12.html

here's the overview

I. overview of the class
present purpose and outline the discussion

I don't have a lot of answers in this segment of the class, just a lot of questions and the observation that denominationalism is a mixed curse, mostly bad with enough good things throw in to confuse me. I believe that after theodicy it is the most telling complaint against the evangelical church in general.

The structure of Presbyterianism, with multiplicity of elders and an hierarchical court system is designed to restrain sin especially heresy by making a Pastor-teacher a member of a peer group that he respects and is accountable to. Making the issue a little oversimplified, to schism over heresy requires two things, teaching heresy and critical mass of adherents to it. With ruling elders there is a good attempt to bring an ongoing recruitment of heresy to Presbytery's attention. If only teaching elders were part of Presbytery this informative function would be missing, the fact being that most Pastors don't listen to each others sermons on a regular basis, their ruling elders do, hence are the ones able to make informed complaints.

Most congregational or independency churches split over personalities, Presbyterians(to their credit) tend to split over theology which includes issues of polity. Hierarchical systems seem to keep schism to a minimum with palace revolts and coup d'etat the common route(change at the top), but when they break they break into really big pieces(see Reformation). What appears to be their strength is ideals like "keys of the kingdom" or "proper bishop succession" with very high priority for everyone in the institution, thus elevated unity to almost the highest goal, something Protestants are reluctant to do, having the Gospel itself being more important than institutional unity or even peace.

What i'd like to understand in this research is summed up in several sets of related terms: broad vs narrow church, inclusive vs exclusive, peace-unity-purity, . All the while keeping in mind that schism is sin, for Jesus presents the metaphors of the church as body-bride-building etc all which accent the unity and oneness of the church. I'd also like to continue with the restorationist and remnant thought that i saw in Calvin last summer. Putting everything together with this line segment picture of the church on a right-left axis as a useful way to visualize the situation.