# Understanding the ARP & Its Relation to Erskine Seminary



## sastark (Jan 27, 2011)

Wes White asked me to write a brief article for his blog to help folks gain some context for understanding news related to the ARP and Erskine. I was happy to oblige, and the article is now posted, here:

Understanding the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church & Its Relation to Erskine Seminary

I do hope it helps!


----------



## brianeschen (Jan 27, 2011)

Great article! It was very helpful. I am glad that the church is taking seriously her role to use the means of oversight and discipline that Christ has given her. It is very encouraging, though it is just a beginning.


----------



## sastark (Jan 27, 2011)

Thanks, Brian! The ARP is far from perfect, but as I say in the article, I do believe we are moving in the correct direction.


----------



## Scott1 (Jan 27, 2011)

Very helpful article- thank you for taking time to write it.

Is it not possible to simply have employment contracts with all officers of the college that condition their office upon doctrinal affiliation, service at the pleasure of the governing board, agreement not to engage in lawsuit without first seeking mediation, etc.?

Is denomination control of its seminary this clear? If not, why not?


----------



## goodnews (Jan 27, 2011)

Scott1 said:


> Very helpful article- thank you for taking time to write it.
> 
> Is it not possible to simply have employment contracts with all officers of the college that condition their office upon doctrinal affiliation, service at the pleasure of the governing board, agreement not to engage in lawsuit without first seeking mediation, etc.?
> 
> Is denomination control of its seminary this clear? If not, why not?



Scott - Seth's article was right on regarding our plight. It's my understanding that the contracts always have had those stipulations in them. They just haven't been taken seriously or enforced by many on the faculty and staff at the college. I think we're trying to move the college to be clearer in those stipulations and enforce those stipulations. The real problem is that most of the faculty/staff who are giving us the hardest time have been tenured or established for quite some time. They were hired in the 70's and 80's with a different mindset than historical ARP distinctives, and as Seth mentioned in his article, have been "tolerated" for a while. The problem (as far as I can tell) is they've taught a lot of ARP's who seem sympathetic to them. 

Also, I'm not sure it's clear how much control the Synod has over the college anyway. But, I'm not a blueblood ARP either so I could be a tad off base on some things.


----------



## Scott1 (Jan 27, 2011)

goodnews said:


> Scott1 said:
> 
> 
> > Very helpful article- thank you for taking time to write it.
> ...


 
It would seem that tenure would be one of the things a denomination controlling it seminary would not have, also something like a year-by-year renewal clause, etc.

Couldn't it set up that all teachers were either church officers (having been through that process somewhere), or otherwise approved by Presbytery and accountable for doctrine and morals that way? Realizing that's not the norm for many colleges, including nominally Christian ones, but this is, after all, the denomination's teaching seminary- paid for by it.

What prevents it from being structured that way?


----------



## sastark (Jan 27, 2011)

Scott1 said:


> What prevents it from being structured that way?



Tradition. Tradition and an entrenched idea that the way things have been going is just fine, and the folks who are saying otherwise are just troublemakers/rabid fundamentalists/insert other ad hominems here.

Remember, too, that Erskine is a very old institution, and as best I can tell, the idea of non-tenured professors at a Seminary is relatively new (did anyone before RTS practice this)? I'm not saying new is bad, I'm just saying, 200+ years of Erskine tradition stand in the way of such reforms.


----------



## goodnews (Jan 27, 2011)

Scott1 said:


> goodnews said:
> 
> 
> > Scott1 said:
> ...



I was speaking more of the situation at the college than the seminary. I agree that all professors (college or seminary) should have a renewal clause in their contracts. But, that's not something that will be easily accepted by some. And, I believe that we should require seminary professors to join the ARP and be under the authority of an ARP presbytery. Yet, in my opinion the seminary is on solid ground for the most part. There have been concerns (again this is my perspective, and I don't want to be too specific on a open forum) with a perceived sympathy toward neo-orthodoxy at the seminary. Whether or not that's true, the seminary is still predominantly orthodox in it's theological teachings.


----------



## Marrow Man (Jan 27, 2011)

You also have the murky situation of government considerations. Government money and financial aid, government accreditation agencies, that sort of thing. These can hold great sway in educational institutions and cause problems. He who pays the piper calls the tune, so to speak. I was reading in Carl Trueman's ebook The Real Scandal of the Evangelical Mind last evening, and he predicts that homosexual agenda will be a driving force in who Christian institutions will follow. The day will come when these institutions will be threatened with the loss of money and/or accreditation if they do no support this agenda. I think he's right. And there are certain alumni of Erskine College and/or Seminary who will sing the line of "let's just along so we can keep the accreditation."


----------



## Micah Everett (Jan 27, 2011)

Marrow Man said:


> You also have the murky situation of government considerations. Government money and financial aid, government accreditation agencies, that sort of thing. These can hold great sway in educational institutions and cause problems. He who pays the piper calls the tune, so to speak. I was reading in Carl Trueman's ebook The Real Scandal of the Evangelical Mind last evening, and he predicts that homosexual agenda will be a driving force in who Christian institutions will follow. The day will come when these institutions will be threatened with the loss of money and/or accreditation if they do no support this agenda. I think he's right. And there are certain alumni of Erskine College and/or Seminary who will sing the line of "let's just along so we can keep the accreditation."




You beat me to this--I would suspect that regional accreditation is a big factor here, at least with the College. SACS (the regional, DoE-recognized association which accredits Erskine) would, I suspect, frown upon the loss of tenure, and/or upon greater denominational control of the institution. Since such accreditation is often necessary for an institution to be eligible for various types of federal financial aid, the temptation to "go along with it" is tremendous.

Still, one might (and should, in my opinion) question whether or not confessional, Reformed, Christian institutions should subject themselves to the requirements of secular accrediting agencies, many of whose criteria for accreditation are based upon unproven, politically correct educational theories, and/or are hostile to the notion of thoroughly Christian education. I am not questioning whether or not accreditation is a good thing--being held to some credible, exterior standard is an important part of maintaining quality. I do wonder, though, whether or not it would be better for Christian institutions to "count the cost" (loss of federal financial aid in particular) and then pull away from the federally recognized accrediting agencies entirely and seek some other credible standard, perhaps like that which the ARTS seminaries seem to be pursuing.


----------



## Grace Alone (Jan 27, 2011)

*Article:"Understanding the ARP Church & Its Relation to Erskine College and Seminary"*

An article by PB member and ARP elder, Seth Stark, was included in The Aquila Report on Jan. 27, 2011. It gives the the history of the relationship between the denomination and it's associated colleges. This involves the school's drift toward liberalism and the denomination's battle to regain influence over the schools in order to see that they are faithful to God and fulfill their mission. As we know, many colleges founded by Christian denominations have totally severed ties and become totally secular. The outcome remains uncertain for our college and seminary, but we pray that the Lord might purify our denomination and help us restore our college and seminary to being institutions that make Christ preeminent in all things.

Understanding the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church & Its Relation to Erskine College and Seminary

---------- Post added at 08:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:38 PM ----------

Okay, I totally missed this thread and posted it again! Thanks to the moderator for moving my post! 

Thanks for writing the article, Seth!


----------



## Scottish Lass (Jan 27, 2011)

goodnews said:


> And, I believe that we should require seminary professors to join the ARP and be under the authority of an ARP presbytery.



One logistical problem with this is that Erskine Seminary has students from other denominations. They need classes in their own polity and history, and so profs from those backgrounds were brought in. Now, those same profs should be able to affirm the statements of faith, etc. and be held to them, but they do sever a purpose. 

What I wish is that non-ARP students (and especially non-Presbyterian students) had to take a Reformed 101 class to so they wouldn't clutter up class time objecting to basic tenets.


----------



## Scott1 (Jan 28, 2011)

It would seem that among the mix of the many colleges and universities, a denomination could support its own for the express purpose of training ministers, elders and teachers to the extent of its own resources.

In this era, people often obtain more than one degree, but this one would be geared toward a teaching seminary, at whatever level God has provided the denomination and supporting people with.

That might be a niche, rather than being all things to all people.


----------



## goodnews (Jan 28, 2011)

Scottish Lass said:


> goodnews said:
> 
> 
> > And, I believe that we should require seminary professors to join the ARP and be under the authority of an ARP presbytery.
> ...



That's a good point Anna. We should make an exception for the adjunct professors from other denominations who are only there to teach their denominational polity. But, all the Bible, theology, Church history, language, and homoletics profs should be ARP, In my humble opinion, even if they hail from other reformed traditions. That way, they are under the authority of an ARP presbytery and subject to discipline if they step out of bounds. When I was at the seminary in the late 90's at least half the students were from the conservative branch of the UMC b/c they didn't have a quality seminary to attend from their own denomination. I always thought they should be required to take a class on Reformed polity too. Most of them seemed intimidated and confused in a certain professors theology classes, even though he tried to be fair, and he did seem to win some of them over on some things. I think that's why the UMC began to frown upon Erskine back then. Too many of their students were leaning more on Calvin than on Wesley. In the end though, it hasn't been the UMC or S. Baptist adjuncts who have been the concern at the seminary since they don't teach the ARP students anything (with one exception in the bible dept, but he's a fantastic Bible professor [Southern Baptist] in my opinion, who has served at an ARP church for decades).


----------



## dudley (Jan 28, 2011)

Seth, Thanks for the post. I just read the article on the site *“Justification by Faith Alone as the Central Dogma of the Reformed Church” *it is very good I will be reading other articles here I am sure, Thanks again.

“ I just read the article now “If You Are a Protestant, What Are You Protesting?” This is also very good. As a former Roman catholic turned Protestant I am aware as the reformers were that we are Protestants because we protest the Roman catholic church and her ritualistic ceremonies. Like the mass which is an abomination and all her ceremonies which are not found in the Word of God. We protest the position that places her tradition on the same level as the Word of God. We protest because we are for the truth of the Gospel and not the heretical Gospel of Rome. The FV supporters do not realize how close their teaching on Justification touches the heresy of her doctrine of works and faith vs. our Protestant doctrine of Faith alone in Christ alone for our salvation. As we are sanctified we of course do good works as Christians. But we can not do anything to attain our salvation ;it is by the grace of God and our being given faith and Christ’s atonement for all who place themselves in Him alone that we are saved. The Protestant doctrine of Justification ids the true dividing line between us and Roman Catholics. I think some Protestants have forgotten that. I can see the difference as did the reformers who renounced Roman Catholicism as did I. I think all Protestants need to read this article.

I think the article “If You Are a Protestant, What Are You Protesting?” should be read by all Protestants.
The historic Protestant doctrine Sola Fide is very important to those of us who are Protestants. It states that the only instrumental cause of justification, from the human perspective, is faith.

While God is the ultimate cause of justification, we who are Protestants believe that faith in Christ through the message of the Gospel is necessary. There are no works, no matter how meritorious they may seem, that can add to justification (Eph. 2:8-9). 

This Protestant doctrine of Justification finds its roots in the teachings of Paul but was obscured by the corruptions of the Roman catholic teachings up to the middle ages. It was restored during the Reformation. I am an ex Roman catholic and now a Protestant, a Presbyterian. As a Protestant who at one time a Roman catholic I want to point out that it is the doctrine of Justification by faith alone in Christ alone which is the dividing point between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. I also want to point out that it is not the doctrine itself that saves, but the reality that the doctrine represents. In other words, one is saved by faith alone, not by belief in the doctrine of faith alone. As well, most Protestants would say, “it is faith alone that saves, but the faith that saves will not be alone.” This doctrine represents a major point of distinction between Protestants and Roman Catholics.

I also think the 5 solas is an area that needs reaffirmation and emphasis in Protestant churches. I think they can be tied into the beautiful doctrine of Justification by faith alone in Christ alone. It is a doctrine that separates us unto the truth of the Gospel message that Christ died for all the sins of men and we are saved not by any merit or doing of our own but only by His divine mercy and His righteousness which grants us salvation. 

I think the Protestant doctrine of Justification is one that many Protestants have forgotten the true meaning of and our assurance of salvation by a simple act of faith in Christ as our savior.

"There are but two religions in the world," we hear Olivetan saying. "The one class of religions are those which men have invented, in all of which man saves himself by ceremonies and good works; the other is that one religion which is revealed in the Bible, and which teaches man to look for salvation solely from the free grace of God." "I will have none of your new doctrines," Calvin sharply rejoins; "think you that I have lived in error all my days?" But Calvin is not so sure of the matter as he looks. The words of his cousin have gone deeper into his heart than he is willing to admit even to himself; and when Olivetan has taken farewell for the day, scarce has the door been closed behind him when Calvin, bursting into tears, falls upon his knees, and gives vent in prayer to the doubts and anxieties that agitate him.

Source: The History of Protestantism, by J.A. Wylie 

Calvin said concerning his conversion: "By a sudden conversion, God subdued and reduced to docility my soul, which was more hardened against such things than one would expect of my youthful years." 

"Like a flash of light, I realized in what an abyss of errors, in what chaos I was." 

Calvin broke with the Roman Church, I can relate with John Calvin because I too broke with the Roman church and her pope as did Calvin and the Reformers and converted to Presbyterianism and became a Protestant just as he and the other reformers did. 

Dudley Davis


----------

