# PCA GA - An Overture to Watch



## Magma2 (Jun 22, 2006)

*Finally something with teeth. Which means for those familiar with the church effeminate that it's sure to die a quick death when it hits the floor. At least there are some Presbyteries left that understand:*

Overture 22 from Suncoast Florida Presbytery (to SJC, pending advice of CCB)
Declare Auburn Avenue Session Heterodox; Appoint Commission to Discipline Auburn Avenue Session; Appoint Commission to Discipline TE Steve Wilkins

Whereas, our Lord rebukes the churches in Pergamum and Thyatira for their tolerance of false teaching (Revelation 2:14-15, 20); and

Whereas, in July of 2005 the Louisiana Presbytery accepted their Committee on Federal Vision Theology's recommendations that Pastor Steve Wilkins of Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church be "publicly exonerated by Louisiana Presbytery, and declared to be faithful to the Confessional standards of the PCA;" and

Whereas, the Summary Statement of AAPC's position on the Covenant, Baptism, and Salvation was "unanimously adopted by the Session of AAPC on April 3, 2005;

Whereas, the session of AAPC sets forth in the Summary Statement a covenant of grace that is said to be made with the elect and reprobate alike, contrary to the Westminster standards:

1. "The Bible ordinarily (though not always) views election through the lens of the covenant. This is why covenant members are addressed consistently as God's elect, even though some of those covenant members may apostatize, proving themselves in the end not to have been among the number of those whom God decreed to eternal salvation from before the foundation of the world. Thus, the basis for calling them God's 'elect' was their standing as members of the Church (which is the body of Christ) and not some knowledge of God's secret decree. The visible Church is the place where the saints are 'gathered and perfected' by means of 'the ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God' (WCF 25.3)." (Auburn Avenue Summary Statement)

2. "God, however, mysteriously has chosen to draw some into the covenant community who are not elect unto eternal salvation. These non-elect covenant members are truly brought to Christ, united to Him in the Church by baptism and receive various gracious operations of the Holy Spirit.

Corporately, they are part of the chosen, redeemed, Spirit-indwelt people. Sooner or later, however, in the wise counsel of God, these fail to bear fruit and fall away. In some sense, they were really joined to the elect people, really sanctified by Christ's blood, really recipients of new life given by the Holy Spirit. God, however, has chosen not to uphold them in the faith, and all is lost. They break the gracious new covenant they entered into at baptism." (Auburn Avenue Summary Statement)

Whereas, the session of AAPC compromises the doctrine of justification by faith alone in Jesus Christ in the Summary Statement with their insistence on the incorporation of each baptized person into Christ through his/her baptism, a status which is maintained or lost by the individual based upon his/her own perseverance in covenant faithfulness, contrary to the Westminster standards:

1. "Once baptized, an individual may be truly called a 'Christian' because he is a member of the household of faith and the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12). However, not all who are 'Christians' in this sense will persevere to the end." (AAPC Summary Statement)

2. "Starting with their baptisms, they have every reason to believe God loves them and desires their eternal salvation. Baptism marks them out as God's elect people, a status they maintain so long as they persevere in faithfulness." (AAPC Summary Statement)

Whereas, the session of AAPC in their Summary Statement erroneously attributes to water baptism the entrance of each baptized individual into actual union with Christ, contrary to the Westminster Standards:

1. "When someone is united to the Church by baptism, he is incorporated into Christ and into His body; he becomes bone of Christ's bone and flesh of His flesh (Eph. 5:30). He becomes a member of "the house, family, and kingdom of God" (WCF 25.2). Until and unless that person breaks covenant, he is to be reckoned among God's elect and regenerate saints." (AAPC Summary Statement)

Whereas, the session of AAPC in their Summary Statement assails the Westminster standards' doctrine of assurance by setting forth a final salvation dependent upon an individual's own covenant faithfulness, a salvation that may be maintained or lost by the individual:

1. "Once baptized, an individual may be truly called a 'Christian' because he is a member of the household of faith and the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12). However, not all who are 'Christians' in this sense will persevere to the end." (AAPC Summary Statement)

2. "Starting with their baptisms, they have every reason to believe God loves them and desires their eternal salvation. Baptism marks them out as God's elect people, a status they maintain so long as they persevere in faithfulness." (AAPC Summary Statement)

Therefore, be it resolved that the Suncoast Florida Presbytery overtures the 34th General Assembly of the PCA to acknowledge the heterodoxy of the session of Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church and the Louisiana Presbytery's error in declaring Pastor Steve Wilkins "faithful to the confessional standards of the PCA."

And be it further resolved for the glory of Christ, the purity of His church, and for the good of Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church, the Louisiana Presbytery, and the Presbyterian Church in America, that a commission be established for disciplinary action against Pastor Wilkins and the Session of Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church.

Adopted by Suncoast Florida Presbytery at the stated meeting on April 4, 2006.
Attested by /s/ Mike Kendrick, Stated Clerk


----------



## Civbert (Jun 22, 2006)

Got a reminder set for 3-pm because that's when the GA is supposed to start hearing the report of the Committee of Commissioners on Bills & Overtures. 

http://www.pcaga.com/schedule.asp

I hope it's an interesting debate before they kick it all to some committee. Any predictions?


----------



## dkicklig (Jun 22, 2006)

Their 1 hour ahead, bills and overtures just started.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jun 22, 2006)

Yes, they just approved the Overture for a Memorial Statement for Ed Clowney


----------



## Civbert (Jun 22, 2006)

Thanks for the heads-up! 

P.S. Glad to hear about the Ed Clowney memorial.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jun 22, 2006)

For viewing the original text of the various overtures as they discuss them:

http://www.pcaac.org/2006 General Assembly/06overtures.htm


----------



## wsw201 (Jun 22, 2006)

Has this Oveture been shot down yet?


----------



## fredtgreco (Jun 22, 2006)

I don't know if it ever made it to the floor. There is a Memorial (technical word) that has made its way to the SJC related to LA Presbytery's action re: Wilkins (it might even be how this worked out, since you can't really create an ad-hoc judicial commission).

This Overture suffers from the typical problems by those who want to do the right thing: no one ever thinks about how it is done, or what is proper and by the book. Instead, they just throw something up, act surprised when someone says the BCO won't allow it, curse the BCO and go on.

Much better to actually research, think ahead and set it up for success. But it is far less work to shoot oneself in the foot and complain.


----------



## Magma2 (Jun 24, 2006)

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> This Overture suffers from the typical problems by those who want to do the right thing: no one ever thinks about how it is done, or what is proper and by the book. Instead, they just throw something up, act surprised when someone says the BCO won't allow it, curse the BCO and go on.
> 
> Much better to actually research, think ahead and set it up for success. But it is far less work to shoot oneself in the foot and complain.




You're right, as far as I can tell it never made it to the floor. In your opinion what can be done since Wilkins was exonerated by the Louisiana Pres and I guess, unless I'm mistaken, is now immune to any real prosecution. Listening to some of the assembly, it seems to me that the PCA will continue to do nothing to remove these Neo-Liberals from their midst and will find a way to tolerate Wilkin's false gospel to be preached along side whatever is left of the true gospel all in the name of peace and unity. While I admit to more than a little frustration, I am at a loss as to what can be done at this point.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jun 24, 2006)

I understand this matter to have been referred to the SJC after their last meeting, pre-Assembly. Ergo, it has not been addressed/dealt with by committee. Thererfore, it was not brought to the floor of GA, or even referenced in the reports.

I do not expect this overture to have any more success than the two other Requests to Assume Original Jurisdiction that _did_ make this GA (same subject). Both of them were found "out of order."


----------



## fredtgreco (Jun 24, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Contra_Mundum_
> I understand this matter to have been referred to the SJC after their last meeting, pre-Assembly. Ergo, it has not been addressed/dealt with by committee. Thererfore, it was not brought to the floor of GA, or even referenced in the reports.
> 
> I do not expect this overture to have any more success than the two other Requests to Assume Original Jurisdiction that _did_ make this GA (same subject). Both of them were found "out of order."



It was not brought to the floor of the GA, because the SJC is the GA. It is the Standing Judicial _Commission_ not Committee. As far as I know, the SJC is considering South Florida's action as a Memorial - it was very poorly drafted in terms of the BCO. But the matter of Wilkins is technically before the General Assembly, when it meets as a commission in October.

There is also the possibility that charges could be filed in Louisianna Presbytery. As far as I know, the actions taken by LA Presbytery were not judicial in nature - no trial, no jeopardy attaching.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jun 24, 2006)

Fred,
True, I well understand the difference between the two.

However, the SJC gives their report to the GA on the business submitted to them. This overture has no case number. The obvious conclusion is that after April 4, 2006, the Suncoast Florida Prsbytery sent their overture to the Stated Clerk, who submitted it to the SJC (as was done with RAOJs case 2005-10 Southern Florida (which is called a "Memorial" on p. 2001, but a RAOJ on pp. 115, and 125 where the text is printed in full); and case 2006-03 Calvary). The SJC has not met since March 2-3, 2006. Memorial to the same effect from Central Carolina (case 2006-2), also referred to the SJC is unfinished and will be taken up at October meeting of SJC (see p. 2001).

You have better knowledge of process and procedure than I do, but this is my take based on all the pw, and having been present. This overture could not have "evaporated," right? It was received and referred prior to GA. It has no case number. It must be awaiting a first glance by the SJC. I suppose in the GA itself, a move could have been made to wrest the overture from the commission, but when is the last time that happenend?

As far as I could tell (or recall) the overture was referred to the SJC (see commissioneer hbk, pp. 32 & 60). However, when the SJC stood to give their report, I see nothing beginning p. 2001 (nor was there any supplemental pw delivered) nor recall anything spoken to the matter. Also, in the pages of the CCB (to who the overture was also referred for advice to the SJC), beginning p. 271, there is nothing at all reference this overture.

B&O, for the remainder of the overtures (ones not referred to another committee), has no reference to it.


----------



## turmeric (Jun 30, 2006)

Did you guys see this?


----------



## Magma2 (Jun 30, 2006)

> _Originally posted by turmeric_
> Did you guys see this?




All talk and no teeth. I thought the GA was supposed to be court? Regardless, let's pray that they do a better job with the doctrine of justification than they did with creation.


----------

