# The Report Passed. Now What Will YOU Do?



## R. Scott Clark (Jun 20, 2007)

On the HB.

rsc


----------



## Davidius (Jun 20, 2007)

If a lay-person is concerned about a ministry candidate should he/she go to the candidate or to the elders?


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Jun 20, 2007)

Yes!

One should document his concerns as best he can. He should write to the clerk of session to ask permission to appear before Session.

It would be best if one can provide some sort of written summary of the issues or concerns so that session has time to think about the issues before they are presented verbally. 

One should seek to be as clear, concise, and cogent as possible. Session has a lot of work to do. Any faithful session will be glad to hear such a presentation.

rsc 



CarolinaCalvinist said:


> If a lay-person is concerned about a ministry candidate should he/she go to the candidate or to the elders?


----------



## BJClark (Jun 21, 2007)

Scott,

I realize as a woman, it's really not my place to address the issue within the church, but my husbands. However, I am e-mailing one of my pastors who was at the GA about it..

This is my opinion of the matter...but I believe others see it the same way..

It appears to me, it will do more harm to the PCA overall if they allow for the individual presbyteries to decide for themselves, and not work together as one body to address the issue with these men.

This is the best word picture I can come up with to describe what I see happening..and why it is so important that it be addressed by ALL the presbyteries together and not left to the individual presbyteries to decide.

It's like a body infected with gangrene that needs to have a foot amputated before it spreads anymore. Do we let it continue to infect the Denomination (body) as whole or do we continue to wait until the leg or both legs need to be amputated off as well?


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Jun 21, 2007)

Bobbi,

I don't know why you couldn't write a letter or speak to your session. As I understand Scripture, you're not to teach, but calling your session to fidelity to their ordination vows is not teaching. I think of Aquilla and Priscilla. 

I know of two cases where husband and wife teams have done great work on behalf of the gospel in both the OPC and the URCs.

Those wives are quite well-read and articulate spokeswomen for the Reformed confession. 

For what it's worth,

rsc



BJClark said:


> Scott,
> 
> I realize as a woman, it's really not my place to address the issue within the church, but my husbands. However, I am e-mailing one of my pastors who was at the GA about it..
> 
> ...


----------



## Civbert (Jun 21, 2007)

BJClark said:


> It appears to me, it will do more harm to the PCA overall if they allow for the individual presbyteries to decide for themselves, and not work together as one body to address the issue with these men...



I don't think that's an option. However, if the presbyteries or sessions with FV'ers don't act, I believe two (or there) outside presbyteries can intercede. The General Assembly itself, acting through the ad interim committee, did all that they can do. And I don't know if the "Standing Judicial Committee" has the authority to over-ride a particular presbytery's decision. Maybe it does. 

It all has to do with the setup of presbyterian government. It's not hierarchical. Nor is it a democracy. The but highest office is "Elder" technically. 

Fred Greco could tell us.

P.S. And Scott is correct in saying that you would not be out of line if you and your husband brought your concerns to your session and presbytery. The actions of the laity may be the most effective.


----------



## BJClark (Jun 23, 2007)

I have e-mailed one of my pastors concerning this...as you can see God is speaking directly to me concerning areas of my own life as well as my heart is burdened about this issue..




What will OUR presbytery do? Will they wait until others speak up or will we take a leading role?

If they are not looking to take a leading role, can I ask why? Is it because these men are not in our specific presbytery and thus does not effect us directly? Or another reason?

I know, I'm asking a lot of questions, and some you may not be able to give answers for, and I realize our own body has it's own issues it is dealing with right now. But I believe they go hand in hand, that if we are going to stand for the purity of the Gospel in one area, then we ought also to stand for the purity of the Gospel in other areas as well. 

Whether it is our presbyteries place to take that lead, I am not sure..but it is certainly something I am praying about. Maybe I am being foolish in my prayers, and maybe even moreso in my expectations and desire to see a John Calvin or Martin Luther rise from up our midst and take such a stand.

As I write this, I see more clearly why God has placed this burden upon my heart, and something I am also praying about, as He shows me the inconsistencies in my own walk and relationship with Him and others, areas I desire to put Him first but do not. Which is in essence the same thing that is going on with this issue, keeping with the purity of the Gospel in all aspects of my life, but also in looking for leaders who will take a stand and lead..an area of struggle in my marriage...desiring my husband to take a more active lead in spiritual and discipline matters in our home..

Maybe the expectation is not foolish, but more one I should have of both myself and others who are called Christians-- be they pastors over the home or the church body as a whole. My prayer is we will all be found faithful to stand firm in God's word...


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Jun 23, 2007)

Bobbi,

Every minister has sworn an oath before God and his church to preserve, protect, and defend (if you will) our confession of faith. Of course, that's the language of the oath of the President of the US but it applies to Presbyterian ministers as well. They do swear similar oaths.

There are practical difficulties. Most ministers are very busy. They have a lot of demands on their time and, when it comes to issues such as these that might seem abstract and theological, they are tempted to say, "Let other men deal with it." 

They are answering the phone and they are making visits, and they are writing sermons and so forth.

It's easy to think that "this" isn't the minister's job, but it is.

Ministers also tend to do that for which they are rewarded. If God's people want their churches to remain churches, they need to encourage their ministers to pay attention to these issues and to spend the time necessary to work on them. Many won't do it if they think that their congregations might not approve or if they think it might lead to "trouble" in their congregations or in their presbytery. Most ministers don't want more trouble, they have enough thank you.

Ouf course that's like watching a brush fire move from hill to hill toward your home or like watchingit burn across the street and hoping that it doesn't hit your house. That's a gamble. Sparks fly! I've seen hot embers float considerable distances and fires do jump roads. So it is with gross error such as that which all confessional Reformed churches face now.

That is why it is not sufficient to say, "Well, GA has spoken. It's all over." No, GA has spoken and now the real work must begin. 

There are overt proponents in the PCA and elsewhere who need to be disciplined and that will only happen when ministers and elders (sessions) lay charges against them. 

If there were wolves around your congregation, you wouldn't say, "Oh I'm sure Rev So and So will take care of it." You would get a rifle, take careful aim and eliminate the threat.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 23, 2007)

R. Scott Clark said:


> On the HB.
> 
> rsc




How influential is this issue? 

Does it have a major following?

How interdenominational is it? i.e. does it easily transfer from Presbyterian/Reformed Churches into Anglican and Baptist churches? How worried should I be?*

*I drew FV to the attention of my former minister and Church Society is now selling Prof. Water's _The Federal Vision and Covenant Theology - A Comparative Analysis_ see here.


----------



## tcalbrecht (Jun 23, 2007)

R. Scott Clark said:


> There are overt proponents in the PCA and elsewhere who need to be disciplined and that will only happen when ministers and elders (sessions) *lay charges against them*.



And, through proper and fair judicial procedures, they are *convicted *of holding these alleged views. Don't forget that part. 

I realize most of these guys have already been convicted in the court of public opinion. The sad part is if they are exonerated in their respective courts whether they will ever be able to get their reputation back and be truly received as brothers in the faith.

I'm not an FV sympathizer, just one who knows the potential for men to be railroaded without a fair and impartial hearing by inept courts of the church.


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Jun 23, 2007)

Richard,

It's hard to tell. The vote at the PCA GA was overwhelming. The FV boys were noticeably silent on the floor.

They make a lot of noise on the web so their influence may seem greater than it is, but they arguably control at least one federation (CREC) and they control a number of churches in the PCA and probaby one presbytery in the PCA. They have been and contnue to exist in the URC and OPC too. 

There are also a number of folk committed to tolerating them -- Anglicans have a little experience with latitudinarianism and we know how that turned out.

s




AV1611 said:


> How influential is this issue?
> 
> Does it have a major following?
> 
> ...


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Jun 23, 2007)

An expanded answer on the HB

rsc



BJClark said:


> I have e-mailed one of my pastors concerning this...as you can see God is speaking directly to me concerning areas of my own life as well as my heart is burdened about this issue..
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## BJClark (Jun 23, 2007)

Scott,



> Every minister has sworn an oath before God and his church to preserve, protect, and defend (if you will) our confession of faith. Of course, that's the language of the oath of the President of the US but it applies to Presbyterian ministers as well. They do swear similar oaths.



As do we all in some aspect when we join the Presbyterian church...we AGREE to be disciplined IF/When needed...(it's actually one of the very things that brings me comfort, knowing that should be expected, even for myself)



> There are practical difficulties. Most ministers are very busy. They have a lot of demands on their time and, when it comes to issues such as these that might seem abstract and theological, they are tempted to say, "Let other men deal with it."



Our Church has a Senior Pastor, Pastor Emeritus an Associate Pastor, Pastorial Assistant, and looking to bring in another associate Pastor..I think we could allow for ONE of them to address this issue. But that's just me..

I don't know maybe having been in the military, I am to militarily minded...I see it as I am in God's Army, I am a soldier of the Cross, and there is an enemy out there that is a threat to our security. God has given each one of us a position in which to serve Him in His Army..and as a woman, I am not in a leadership position...so in many ways, my hands are tied to 'doing' anything other than encouraging and supporting those whom God has placed in command. 

And certainly is frustrating from where I am sitting, not seeing anyone willing to take the lead!! 

I imagine this is how our troops feel over in Iraq, knowing there is a battle to be fought, and having congress arguing over what the next move will be and who will make it...and I'm sure many of them (such as at Abu Ghraib Prison) got frustrated and decided to take matters into their own hands...but I do not want to do that, as I know there are consequences, so I wait and pray the Lord will raise up such a leader within our midst...one who is willing to make the hard decisions, and step out in faith and trust that GOD is directing the path...

What a sad state of affairs, seeing our church leaders acting like our government leaders and not our government leaders following the lead of our Church leaders..

Okay, I seem to be ranting...


----------



## turmeric (Jun 23, 2007)

Definitely we all need to pray. I imagine the presbyteries are watching the Wilkins affair with a finger in the air to test the wind. If the SJC is firm with him, you'll see the presbyteries imitate them. Hence again, we need to pray.


----------



## BJClark (Jun 24, 2007)

Civbert,

I think this article covers how this issue should be addressed...and yes it does appear to be an option...

http://www.pcahistory.org/documents/wip.html



> The three great negations of Presbyterianism—that is, the three great errors which it denies are—1. That all church power vests in the clergy. 2. That the apostolic office is perpetual. 3. That each individual Christian congregation is independent. *The affirmative statement of these principles is—1. That the people have a right to a substantive part in the government of the Church. 2. That presbyters, who minister in word and doctrine, are the highest permanent officers of the Church, and all belong to the same order. 3. That the outward and visible Church is, or should be, one, in the sense that a smaller part is subject to a larger, and a larger to the whole.* It is not holding one of these principles that makes a man a Presbyterian, but his holding them all.


----------



## ef (Jul 7, 2007)

Ok. I've got it. 

But now when will we deal with the long-standing, arguably more problematic issues in our confessionally reformed circles like conversionism?

I recognize and understand the issues with FV/AAT/NPP and will do what I can to clean it out of the denominations I'm a part of (I'm currently in the process of transfer from PCA to OPC) but I'd like to see a serious handling of the other end of the stick. 

I've never been examined by a Session as to my theological understanding of the Reformed faith. I've been asked to "share my testimony". When my daughter's faith was examined by our Session, she was asked to share a verse "that meant a lot to her". She wasn't examined from the catechism at all. In fact, no one in our 6 years there ever encouraged the members of the congregation to read the Standards as part of family worship from the pulpit. In fact, no one ever spoke of family worship. 

The report passed alright. It was a great report, too. It nailed 'em. What'll I do? I'll watch both ends of the spectrum and work to see an orthodox reformed view of Church and Church ministry all the way around.

Praise God from whom all blessings flow!


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Jul 12, 2007)

Hi Eric,

You're absolutely right. Confessional Reformed Christianity is neither sacerdotalist nor revivalist. 

Some of us are fighting a two front battle. 

That said, I don't think the two are morally equivalent. The doctrine of justification is the article of the standing or falling of the church. The same isn't true of our issues with the revivalists/conversionists etc.

That's a matter of getting folk to think in confessional categories. In my experience, when the alternative is explained ("the means of grace") most Reformed folk are happy to hear it.

It will take time, just as it will take time to reform worship according to the Word. 

rsc




ef said:


> Ok. I've got it.
> 
> But now when will we deal with the long-standing, arguably more problematic issues in our confessionally reformed circles like conversionism?
> 
> ...


----------



## ef (Jul 13, 2007)

Prof. Clark,

You're absolutely correct in suggesting a lack of moral equivalence between the two issues if we're assuming that conversionists hold the same view of justification that you and I do. Based upon some of your other posts I know that you recognize the folly of such an assumption. 

My concerns stated above come from the experience I've had in my short time as a reformed believer. The congregation I've been a part of has a Session that is decidedly "bapterion," and more "bapt" than "terion" at that! 

It seems to me that many who lament the FV (this is not directed at you) don't recognize the problems with the modern "faith as works" justification of Evangelicalism (and Rome). Modernism has set us up to be much more critical of sacardotalism with its supernatural view of sacramental efficacy, while ignoring the problems with the subjectivity of the "conversion experience". That is, we behave altogther consistently with our Modern American identity when we suspect the FV as well as when we (as denominations) ignore conversionism. 

I don't mean to preach to the choir; I'm encouraged by you, Pastor Hyde, Drs. Hart and Horton, Pastor Millward at Redeemer PCA in Traverse City, Michigan and others who have all helped me see what there are worthy men who recognize the two-front struggle we face. 

Take care,


EF


----------

