# WTS has some splainin to do



## A.Joseph

None of this makes much sense. I guess we don’t have to know everything. But is this a bad sign? Dr. Tipton is the kinda guy you’d want to hold onto at all costs. But it appears that just the opposite has occurred. Not sure why this couldn’t have been resolved and this type of outcome avoided.

https://reformedforum.org/dr-lane-g-tipton-appointed-as-fellow-of-biblical-and-systematic-theology/

“I am grateful for a second announcement from the Seminary yesterday that eliminates much of the darker innuendo of the previous one by posing and answering three “FAQs” (Frequently Asked Questions). The Seminary’s answer to the first of those questions appears to deny any connection between the decision to end my employment and my efforts to express my concerns regarding the theological formulations of Dr. Scott Oliphint with respect to the doctrine of God. However, I see it very differently. There were no complaints about my conduct during my fifteen year tenure at Westminster, at least none of which I was ever made aware, until after charges were brought against Dr. Oliphint in the courts of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and my name appeared as a potential expert witness regarding the theological issues that were raised by those charges. The first complaints about me to the Board of Trustees, as least insofar as I was told, were raised by Seminary leadership in May, after the charges against Dr. Oliphint had been dismissed. According to what I was told, those complaints began as pertaining to purported administrative inefficiencies on my part, but soon expanded to include dissatisfaction over how I responded to a series of Seminary inquiries regarding my connection to the ecclesiastical charges against Dr. Oliphint. The cumulative effect of these complaints led to the ending of my time at Westminster.”


----------



## TylerRay

Trueman's professorship ended after he opposed Oliphint's views, too. So did Jeff Waddington's position.

Reactions: Like 6 | Sad 1


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Moderator Hat On

Let me just head this off as a Moderator. Please understand that we shouldn't speculate. We should be careful to not imply motive based upon speculation or develope theories of suspicion. Remember the rules here as it pertains to the 9th Commandment. https://www.puritanboard.com/help/9th-commandment/

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 2


----------



## Pergamum

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Let me just head this off as a Moderator. Please understand that we shouldn't speculate. We should be careful to not imply motive based upon speculation or develope theories of suspicion. Remember the rules here as it pertains to the 9th Commandment. https://www.puritanboard.com/help/9th-commandment/


Good move.


----------



## jwright82

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Moderator Hat On
> 
> Let me just head this off as a Moderator. Please understand that we shouldn't speculate. We should be careful to not imply motive based upon speculation or develope theories of suspicion. Remember the rules here as it pertains to the 9th Commandment. https://www.puritanboard.com/help/9th-commandment/


Since we don't know what went on behind closed doors, we are in no place to judge. That said on the surface it seems a little odd. Perhaps one day someone will right a book analysing what went down, like that book on the Shepherd affair.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Edward

The Moscow Rules.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Smeagol

TylerRay said:


> Trueman's professorship ended after he opposed Oliphint's views, too. So did Jeff Waddington's position.


This just seems very puzzling. If the case if over why is more info not released for the sake of vindicating all parties. These men seem like they are gifted professors and are now being released. Hopefully more details can be brought to light. The hush hush only makes it all seem more puzzling. I was under the impression that bringing charges was normal Presbyterianism (though still serious) and now we have men being fired. This is going from "puzzling and still waiting for information" to becoming "slightly alarming".


----------



## A.Joseph

Im sorry to say this, but it sounds kind of punitive and petty. That’s as far as I will speculate.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

G said:


> This just seems very puzzling. If the case if over why is more info not released for the sake of vindicating all parties.


It isn't always good to release information as fast as we want to know the facts. That is true in a lot of situations. As much as it is public it also has some privacy issues that need to be considered in all cases. This group of men are all men under authority. We should just be patient and allow God and his means to work it all out.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## A.Joseph

It’s not clear how Dr. Tipton became a witness. He spoke to it, but I missed his explanation, and he was hesitant to say too much at the time. (I didn’t want to press him any further and don’t intend to). But it seems like they considered him acting as an expert witness a big no-no, at least in this case.


G said:


> This just seems very puzzling. If the case if over why is more info not released for the sake of vindicating all parties. These men seem like they are gifted professors and are now being released. Hopefully more details can be brought to light. The hush hush only makes it all seem more puzzling. I was under the impression that bringing charges was normal Presbyterianism and now we have men being fired. This is going from puzzling and still waiting for information to becoming slightly alarming.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

A.Joseph said:


> Im sorry to say this, but it sounds kind of punitive and petty.


It sounds punitive because of what Professor / Pastor Lane posted. It is speculative as far as I read it. We should tread lightly. Please. There is no need to speculate or imply so soon. I will close this thread if the speculation keeps up. Give it time. Be Patient. It might take years but there is no need for us to be overly judgmental about things we can only speculate about.

BTW, Lane does not appear to be in a bad spot. He has a new position and is a Pastor as I understand it.


----------



## jwright82

A.Joseph said:


> It’s not clear how Dr. Tipton became a witness. He spoke to it, but I missed his explanation, and he was hesitant to say too much at the time. (I didn’t want to press him any further any time I spoke with him afterwards and don’t intend to). But it seems like they considered that a big no-no.


Than we ought to honor their privacy. We have all been involved in situations where we wanted our privacy to be respected and all had people trying to pry into. Also there have been times where knew things about others but refrained from saying it no matter what it was. In time we will learn more, maybe maybe not.


----------



## yeutter

jwright82 said:


> Than we ought to honor their privacy. We have all been involved in situations where we wanted our privacy to be respected and all had people trying to pry into. Also there have been times where knew things about others but refrained from saying it no matter what it was. In time we will learn more, maybe maybe not.



Agreed, we need to honor their privacy, but Prof. Tipton does not seem to be concerned about that from the statement he issued.
Westminster Seminary needs to act quickly to reassure the broader Reformed community. One of Westminster Seminary's strongest supporters within the continuing Anglican movement has denounced the decision to release Prof. Tipton.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## alexandermsmith

Something _seems _to be rotten at WTS.

Glad Tipton has found a place where he can feel at home. But anyone else concerned with the expanding nature of Reformed Forum? What exactly is it now? It started as a podcast but now seems to have morphed into some sort of ministry. I have found them a very valuable resource over the years, producing many shows which reward repeated listens, but this recent development in its "mission" is concerning.


----------



## Taylor

alexandermsmith said:


> ...this recent development in its "mission" is concerning.



What's wrong with "support[ing] the Church in her charge of presenting every person mature in Christ_"?_


----------



## alexandermsmith

Taylor Sexton said:


> What's wrong with "support[ing] the Church in her charge of presenting every person mature in Christ_"?_



Yeah but what does that mean in practice? It's one thing for ministers to produce a podcast on the side (amazing they can find the time, it did start off when they were in seminary after all). But now Reformed Forum has formal ministry posts. Are they a church? Are they a seminary? What are they exactly?

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Taylor

alexandermsmith said:


> Yeah but what does that mean in practice? It's one thing for ministers to produce a podcast on the side (amazing they can find the time, it did start off when they were in seminary after all). But now Reformed Forum has formal ministry posts. Are they a church? Are they a seminary? What are they exactly?



It is a ministry. Pastor Camden, whom I know personally, was called by his session at Hope OPC in Grayslake, IL, to be an Evangelist in the OPC, with Reformed Forum being the medium.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## alexandermsmith

Taylor Sexton said:


> It is a ministry. Pastor Camden, whom I know personally, was called by his session at Hope OPC in Grayslake, IL, to be an Evangelist in the OPC, with Reformed Forum being the medium.



So what is Lane Tipton's position? Has he been called by Hope OPC to his new position? What is a podcast ministry? These are just questions I think we should ask ourselves. It's nothing personal against the men (whom you know personally).


----------



## Taylor

alexandermsmith said:


> So what is Lane Tipton's position? Has he been called by Hope OPC to his new position?



Those are good questions. I am not sure, to be honest. I can talk to them about it. I am sure it is being handled well, as Reformed Forum, as far as I can guess, is under the direct oversight of the session of Hope OPC.


----------



## NaphtaliPress

This probably comes with little surprise. Jeff had been suspended for the trial duration when he joined others in making the charges for which Dr. Tipton was to be a witness.
"It is with much sadness that I note that earlier this week I submitted my resignation as adjunct professor of systematic theology at Westminster Theological Seminary. The administration has questionably handled recent faculty problems and has indicated it wants to travel down a path I cannot in good conscience follow with it. I shall miss the teaching opportunities and fellowship with students. I pray that our great and glorious Triune God will turn the school and its administration around and put it back on the path laid out by J. Gresham Machen in 1929." Jeffrey C. Waddington, public post to Facebook.

Reactions: Like 2 | Informative 3 | Sad 1


----------



## A.Joseph

Taylor Sexton said:


> It is a ministry. Pastor Camden, whom I know personally, was called by his session at Hope OPC in Grayslake, IL, to be an Evangelist in the OPC, with Reformed Forum being the medium.


I think it’s a good platform, and a sound alternative, to this unfortunate turn of events. It may be time for Pastor Tipton’s profile to increase a bit. We all need to get behind it. It feels like an ever growing grass roots movement, or something like that.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

There are some good questions here. I wonder what the goal of Reformed Forum might be. I have been out of the loop for a few years and didn't even know about the recent activities of the past few years concerning Oliphant. I would like to know what the specific charges were that were leveled against him. I wonder why they were dismissed. I am sure the OPC has a better picture of this.

I like Reformed Forum. I irritated poor Jim Cassidy over the Meredith Kline issue for a few years. It was a complicated issue. I don't think I lowered myself to imply ill suspicious motive when I confronted people based upon doctrinal issues. I tried to keep it based upon doctrine. I sensed a justification when the OPC Study came out. It took me years to get to that point. I started asking questions in 2011. It took years of study and going back and forth with guys on both sides of the issue. I was encouraged to sit on my hands and just shut up sometimes by good Leaders and Eldership. Be Patient. Trust God's means of authority. Affections will run high. After all these are people we love and respect. Let's give them our respect. I mean that for both sides of the issue. They deserve our love and respect. They labor hard for us and on our behalf before God. Let's not impune them with ill suspicious motive.

It just might be a good providence also. Maybe God is forming a new work. I am trying to see the positive in this without downgrading to implying ill suspicion or ill motive. Let's be patient. I like Lane Tipton a lot. I think the world of Jeffrey Waddington. I love Westminster Philadelphia. We just don't know the full story and we need to be patient.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Smeagol

I think the below have been facts:

1. Formal charges were brought regarding teaching in one of Oliphint's books.
2. It seems Oliphint has "corrected" his view as he is re-writing some of the book for re-release.
3. The evidence for the charge seems to have been dismissed because of the age of the book (over 2 years old).
4. The destruction of the 1st edition of his book would seem to say that the writing did in fact contain teaching contrary to the Westminster Standards.
5. @PuritanCovenanter keeps spelling the professor's name "Oliphant", which is making me think of LOTR.

If anything above be false or speculative, please help me correct it.

I can see why charges were dismissed if Oliphint corrected his view and is now changing his book. That seems to be a favorable solution to the divisive, yet sometimes needed, process of carrying out formal charges IF the charged is relenting anyways. The odd part is that now at least 2 men, who were in some way involved in the charge, have been fired in a "politically correct" manner.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Was this over impassibility. Sorry I got the spelling incorrect, Oliphint. BTW, I liked LOTR. I remember discussions on that a long time ago. It really wasn't a small matter if that was the issue. I basically bowed out of life and lost touch of what was going on for about 3 years due to health issues.


----------



## Smeagol

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Was this over impassibility. Sorry I got the spelling incorrect, Oliphint. BTW, I liked LOTR. I remember discussions on that a long time ago. It really wasn't a small matter if that was the issue. I basically bowed out of life and lost touch of what was going on for about 3 years due to health issues.


I believe so. I love (oops this is PB)...I mean like LOTR as well

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## A.Joseph

TylerRay said:


> Trueman's professorship ended after he opposed Oliphint's views, too. So did Jeff Waddington's position.


Is there a practical distinction between Truemans response and Waddingtons? I’ve watched and listened to Waddington at RF and personally I think he’s great; he seems to have lots of passion, zeal and biblical knowledge. But could it be perceived that he was out of line being the one to bring about the charge against Dr. O., based upon the vast contrast in years/position/title/status (seems almost like a David taking on a Goliath). Just because he acted appropriately doesn’t mean some would not view it in poor taste, possibly/unfortunately.


----------



## jwright82

NaphtaliPress said:


> This probably comes with little surprise. Jeff had been suspended for the trial duration when he joined others in making the charges for which Dr. Tipton was to be a witness.
> "It is with much sadness that I note that earlier this week I submitted my resignation as adjunct professor of systematic theology at Westminster Theological Seminary. The administration has questionably handled recent faculty problems and has indicated it wants to travel down a path I cannot in good conscience follow with it. I shall miss the teaching opportunities and fellowship with students. I pray that our great and glorious Triune God will turn the school and its administration around and put it back on the path laid out by J. Gresham Machen in 1929." Jeffrey C. Waddington, public post to Facebook.


I have to ask though, the official statement by Dr. Tipton was that something like "my actions in the OPC hearing were viewed by some in the seminary BOD as violating the code of conduct of proffessers". That's a summery at best but, so I apologise, Jeff was suspended for perhaps similar reasons. Is this a conflict of interest in having faculty members in the same denomination and school so that business of one bleeds over into the business of another?


----------



## TylerRay

A.Joseph said:


> Is there a practical distinction between Truemans response and Waddingtons? I’ve watched and listened to Waddington at RF and personally I think he’s great; he seems to have lots of passion, zeal and biblical knowledge. But could it be perceived that he was out of line being the one to bring about the charge against Dr. O., based upon the vast contrast in years/position/title/status (seems almost like a David taking on a Goliath). Just because he acted appropriately doesn’t mean some would not view it as poor taste, unfortunately.


Waddington has a PhD in systematic theology. I think he's competent to spot heresy. It was bold, no doubt, but I don't think there was any importunity in his action, especially since he was joining his voice with the voices of men of greater experience.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 2


----------



## A.Joseph

TylerRay said:


> Waddington has a PhD in systematic theology. I think he's competent to spot heresy. It was bold, no doubt, but I don't think there was any importunity in his action, especially since he was joining his voice with the voices of men of greater experience.


Bold, for sure. Others may have weighed the risk and counted the cost. I’m not sure if there are pleas behind the scenes that were ignored and if the accused feels a bit of public humiliation. I don’t think it has to be this way if Dr.O. could have provided further clarification. Personally I reserve the right to lovingly challenge and the right to humbly reconsider our positions without pride getting in the way. But life and the natural human condition often does not work that way. I’m the first to admit.


----------



## ZackF

The whole episode was and is sad. 

I've profited at some level from every name mentioned in this thread. Be that as it is, I don't see why that can't continue. It is that simple to me. I'm not left with need to find a side to take or feel I need to get more information in order to take one. We can be grateful that we were not in a position of having had to adjudicate anything. Whatever _possible_ wrong doing that came to pass, Paul and Barnabas remain my examples in cases like this. Sometimes a parting of the ways is the best handling of a given situation that God may be glorified.

Reactions: Like 1 | Amen 1


----------



## SolaScriptura

Why does it seem that WTS keeps having controversies? I'll let others examine and explain, but to a casual observer it reeks of instability. What I do know is that I can't in good conscience encourage people to go there.

Reactions: Like 7


----------



## A.Joseph

I will have to disagree with you there. This even on the surface is highly irregular, taking side’s notwithstanding. Which I’m not looking to do. Every issue has a side, thus such a non default is an impossibility.

We are dealing with doctrine and dismissals, how can there be no concerns for WTS here.

Of course I agree with your overall sentiment, doctrinal clarity notwithstanding. Tipton is obviously no slouch.


ZackF said:


> The whole episode was and is sad.
> 
> I've profited at some level from every name mentioned in this thread. Be that as it is, I don't see why that can't continue. It is that simple to me. I'm not left with need to find a side to take or feel I need to get more information in order to take one. We can be grateful that we were not in a position of having had to adjudicate anything. Whatever _possible_ wrong doing that came to pass, Paul and Barnabas remain my examples in cases like this. Sometimes a parting of the ways is the best handling of a given situation that God may be glorified.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress

I'm not sure this was avoidable. If all those involved were the same denomination, the ones filing charges had obligations and avenues to address doctrinal heresy. That could happen in any institution separate from the OPC if OPC are working together in it.


jwright82 said:


> I have to ask though, the official statement by Dr. Tipton was that something like "my actions in the OPC hearing were viewed by some in the seminary BOD as violating the code of conduct of proffessers". That's a summery at best but, so I apologise, Jeff was suspended for perhaps similar reasons. Is this a conflict of interest in having faculty members in the same denomination and school so that business of one bleeds over into the business of another?

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## A.Joseph

And I think that’s a natural consequence. That’s the optics, yet WTS chose to go there with Tipton, really? (Trueman?) Come on. Brilliant minds. How does WTS benefit? Anyway, what’s done is done. It just feels really wrong. I don’t understand what Pastor Tipton did wrong? I’m hurt for him.


SolaScriptura said:


> Why does it seem that WTS keeps having controversies? What I do know is that I can't in good conscience encourage people to go there.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

A.Joseph said:


> Trueman?


I read somewhere that Trueman left to take a position at another School.

I read yesterday that he left for Grove City College? I have no solid knowledge of this stuff. I am still catching up.


----------



## A.Joseph

So he was still suspended without pay prior to his resignation?


NaphtaliPress said:


> This probably comes with little surprise. Jeff had been suspended for the trial duration when he joined others in making the charges for which Dr. Tipton was to be a witness.
> "It is with much sadness that I note that earlier this week I submitted my resignation as adjunct professor of systematic theology at Westminster Theological Seminary. The administration has questionably handled recent faculty problems and has indicated it wants to travel down a path I cannot in good conscience follow with it. I shall miss the teaching opportunities and fellowship with students. I pray that our great and glorious Triune God will turn the school and its administration around and put it back on the path laid out by J. Gresham Machen in 1929." Jeffrey C. Waddington, public post to Facebook.


----------



## jwright82

NaphtaliPress said:


> I'm not sure this was avoidable. If all those involved were the same denomination, the ones filing charges had obligations and avenues to address doctrinal heresy. That could happen in any institution separate from the OPC if OPC are working together in it.


Right but it does raise the question if this is the best way for the relationship to be, due to possible conflicts of interest? I'm not saying its wrong but did similar COI happened in the Shepherd trials? Or Enns? This may just be, an unfortunate and sad fluke and not a real systemic problem in the relationship between the school and the church. Just thoughts. I'm certainly not weighing in one way or the other. I have defended Oliphint's views on this subject, I won't do so in this thread, in the past. 
But until more information is available, I'm not going to judge whether or not WTS, or anyone involved was at fault. I do think it is sad that in at least in this case the COI might have been a problem. 
Than again I haven't read the faculty code of conduct, shouldn't the OPC have called another expert witness to avoid all this? I mean we don't know if was called or volunteered, which would make a huge difference.


----------



## NaphtaliPress

A.Joseph said:


> So he was still suspended without pay prior to his resignation?


I don't know whether he ever taught again after the trial ended. I know there were pleas to the school to restore him due to financial hardship. Not sure if they listened or not.


----------



## NaphtaliPress

Seminaries should not be independent in my opinion; then no question there is one ecclesiastical jurisdiction. But that is not the situation.


jwright82 said:


> Right but it does raise the question if this is the best way for the relationship to be, due to possible conflicts of interest? I'm not saying its wrong but did similar COI happened in the Shepherd trials? Or Enns? This may just be, an unfortunate and sad fluke and not a real systemic problem in the relationship between the school and the church. Just thoughts. I'm certainly not weighing in one way or the other. I have defended Oliphint's views on this subject, I won't do so in this thread, in the past.
> But until more information is available, I'm not going to judge whether or not WTS, or anyone involved was at fault. I do think it is sad that in at least in this case the COI might have been a problem.
> Than again I haven't read the faculty code of conduct, shouldn't the OPC have called another expert witness to avoid all this? I mean we don't know if was called or volunteered, which would make a huge difference.

Reactions: Like 7 | Amen 4


----------



## jwright82

NaphtaliPress said:


> Seminaries should not be independent in my opinion; then no question there is one ecclesiastical jurisdiction. But that is not the situation.


That could solve the problem. But it would cut down on financial giving. But it does seem like that is kind of what's going here, at least possibly. WTS could be acting underhanded but we don't know. So it could be legitimate, illegitimate, or some mixture. 
But the church/school relationship could also be the problem as a reality of the way things are, not the way they things should be.


----------



## NaphtaliPress

Since he's resigned from WTS Jeff Waddington has restored an article he wrote last June taken down due to a WTS gag order on faculty on the matter. This controversy isn't going away any time soon. https://reformedforum.org/something-so-simple-i-shouldnt-have-to-say-it/
--- Post updated ---
Since he's resigned from WTS Jeff Waddington has restored an article he wrote last June taken down due to a WTS gag order on faculty on the matter. This controversy isn't going away any time soon. https://reformedforum.org/something-so-simple-i-shouldnt-have-to-say-it/

Reactions: Like 3 | Informative 2


----------



## A.Joseph

TylerRay said:


> Trueman's professorship ended after he opposed Oliphint's views, too. So did Jeff Waddington's position.


I guess we don’t know if there was a direct correlation there regarding Trueman,correct?


----------



## BottleOfTears

PuritanCovenanter said:


> I read somewhere that Trueman left to take a position at another School.
> 
> I read yesterday that he left for Grove City College? I have no solid knowledge of this stuff. I am still catching up.


There seems to be several reasons behind Dr. Trueman leaving. For one, he had been bi-vocational, working both as a professor and as a minister, which he found incredibly difficult. He had a one point been very much in favour of it, but he has since said he is unsure whether bi-vocational ministry is the way forward.

So that would make it a natural time to leave WTS if he is changing jobs anyway.

As for why he went to Grove City College, he has said that he enjoys teaching undergrads, which he has not done in a while.

There hasn't been anything said regarding any other reason for leaving Westminster. That said, he has, along with 11 other OPC elders written a letter to WTS around April this year concerning Jeff Waddington's situation.

You may find these lectures he gave at WSCAL in March very informative. The first is on bi-vocational minstry, the second on issues in Reformed seminaries, particularly in how they market themselves to donors and prospective students over other similar seminaries. The third is more to do with modern culture and sexuality and why people think the way they do about these things, really a condensed version of the two lectures he gave at RTS DC on the same topic.

If anyone hasn't listened to them yet I would highly recommend you do.

Reactions: Like 2 | Informative 1


----------



## Smeagol

NaphtaliPress said:


> Since he's resigned from WTS Jeff Waddington has restored an article he wrote last June taken down due to a WTS gag order on faculty on the matter. This controversy isn't going away any time soon. https://reformedforum.org/something-so-simple-i-shouldnt-have-to-say-it/
> --- Post updated ---
> Since he's resigned from WTS Jeff Waddington has restored an article he wrote last June taken down due to a WTS gag order on faculty on the matter. This controversy isn't going away any time soon. https://reformedforum.org/something-so-simple-i-shouldnt-have-to-say-it/


Very helpful and eye-opening, thanks for sharing.

From Camden Bucey in the comments:



> *Camden Bucey*
> 6 months ago
> 
> 
> Brandon,
> 
> Thank you for your comment. To be clear, Dr. Oliphint has not retracted _God With Us_. Westminster Theological Seminary bought the rights to the book and the remaining copies from Crossway, which they destroyed several years ago. This was done with a view toward Dr. Oliphint writing a revision. Nevertheless, Dr. Oliphint has nowhere publicly stated which, if any, of the views in the book he no longer holds. Moreover, the thesis of _God With Us_ is found throughout many of Dr. Oliphint’s other publications.
> 
> This may seem sudden to you, but others have been working quietly with Dr. Oliphint on these matters for years. Several people, including myself, have sent him emails and letters and have received no response. We had refrained from interacting publicly because people told us they were working with him on a revision. But I became discouraged once one such person reported that Dr. Oliphint asked him to quit sending him any more material regarding the thesis of his book.
> 
> I continue to look forward to a revision should one be published.
> 
> Camden



The seminary bought the rights and destroyed the books. Wow.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## yeutter

NaphtaliPress said:


> Seminaries should not be independent in my opinion; then no question there is one ecclesiastical jurisdiction. But that is not the situation.


Training of men to serve as presbyters was historically an ecclesiastical responsibility. The modern stand alone Seminary is a novelty.

Reactions: Like 3 | Amen 2


----------



## RamistThomist

BottleOfTears said:


> There hasn't been anything said regarding any other reason for leaving Westminster. That said, he has, along with 11 other OPC elders written a letter to WTS around April this year concerning Jeff Waddington's situation.



The quotes from Aquila say that Waddington was dismissed because he signed onto a document questioning the orthodoxy of Oliphint's views, which was not unreasonable. That means the actions look like payback. Of course, how this relates to Tipton is beyond my ken.

The letter indicated that “the suspension is on the grounds that Jeff signed charges against Dr. Oliphint and is to be for the duration of the trial process.” As was reported, at its March 27, 2019 chapel service, Dr. Peter Lillback, President of Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia, informed the student body regarding a charge that had been brought against Dr. Scott Oliphint, Professor of Apologetics.

The charge alleges that Dr. Oliphint, in his book _God with Us: Divine Condescension and the Attributes of God_, presents a view of God’s immutability that appears to allow that God can assume new properties and changes in relating to creation, and that such a view is contrary to the Scriptures and the Westminster Standards. Dr. Oliphint is a ministerial member of the Presbytery of the Southwest of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), where the charges have been filed.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

"Dr. Lillback’s comments can be viewed here. He addressed three points: (1) A statement regarding our doctrinal statements themselves, the Westminster Standards; (2) a statement of events that have occurred here at Westminster in recent days; and (3) a president’s statement of his sense of the faculty at this moment."

The video link is set to private...


----------



## A.Joseph

BayouHuguenot said:


> The quotes from Aquila say that Waddington was dismissed because he signed onto a document questioning the orthodoxy of Oliphint's views, which was not unreasonable. *That means the actions look like payback. Of course, how this relates to Tipton is beyond my ken.*


Same

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

SolaScriptura said:


> Why does it seem that WTS keeps having controversies? I'll let others examine and explain, but to a casual observer it reeks of instability. What I do know is that I can't in good conscience encourage people to go there.


I wonder if the OPC will have a statement.

There are other options for Seminary. Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary where Joel Beeke is President, Mid America Reformed Theological Seminary where Cornel Venema is President and OPC Prof. Dr. Alan Strange (whom I deeply appreciate) teaches, Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary where Barry York is President, and Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary where Joseph Pipa is President. I have met all four Presidents and communicated with three of them. They were very approachable and patient with my ignorance and questions. They are the coolest guys. There are some of the best teachers at these Seminaries and they patiently helped me a lot. Lane Tipton allowed me to correspond with him via email after we met. He was very balanced and tried to help me also. These are the kind of Guys I want to teach future Elders of the next generation. There are better options than Westminster maybe.

At the same time I agree with Chris, our Seminaries should have the accountability of being under denominational ecclesiology. RPTS is.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## TylerRay

A brother in the OPC who knows more about these things than I do has corrected me in a PM--Trueman did not sign the charges against Oliphint.

He did, however, sign the petition regarding Waddington's suspension, and I know he disagrees with Oliphint on these matters. I was mistaken regarding his participation in the Oliphint case, however.

Give me a short time, and I will correct my posts.


----------



## greenbaggins

The doctrinal issues, for those who haven't gone to read Waddington's post, which is excellent, are concerning a new sort of attribute of God, called "covenantal attributes," which Oliphint evidently feels the need to insert into his doctrine of God in order to explain how it is that God can interact with humans at all. This kind of attribute, on the face of it at least, contradicts the simplicity of God, which says that God is his attributes, that the attributes are not parts of God (God cannot be reduced to a series of ingredients) but are rather various ways of looking at the one essence of God. 

As to the way that WTS has handled the matter, I counsel patience and saying less rather than more. We don't know all the facts, and it is perilous to judge when we only have one half of the story. I have talked extensively with Waddington and others about this matter, and they are fairly guarded even themselves, so less is definitely better. Neither I nor anyone else not in the know have access to the board's decisions and discussions about the matter. We simply don't know why the seminary has done what they have done. It might look a certain way with the evidence we currently have, but I stress again that when we only have half the story, we tend to prejudge the issue, and that doesn't do anyone any favors. I would prefer that people not issue judgmental statements against WTS for their decisions.

Reactions: Like 6 | Informative 1


----------



## A.Joseph

PuritanCovenanter said:


> "Dr. Lillback’s comments can be viewed here. He addressed three points: (1) A statement regarding our doctrinal statements themselves, the Westminster Standards; (2) a statement of events that have occurred here at Westminster in recent days; and (3) a president’s statement of his sense of the faculty at this moment."
> 
> The video link is set to private...


What did ya think ?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Thanks for reeling this back in Lane. This is what I really think A. 



greenbaggins said:


> Neither I nor anyone else not in the know have access to the board's decisions and discussions about the matter. We simply don't know why the seminary has done what they have done. It might look a certain way with the evidence we currently have, but I stress again that when we only have half the story, we tend to prejudge the issue, and that doesn't do anyone any favors. I would prefer that people not issue judgmental statements against WTS for their decisions.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

greenbaggins said:


> The doctrinal issues, for those who haven't gone to read Waddington's post, which is excellent, are concerning a new sort of attribute of God, called "covenantal attributes,"


I read about this covenantal attributes thing a long time ago when Ruben was dealing with simplicity. What post are you referring to that Jeffrey Waddington made? Is it available?


----------



## A.Joseph

I agree with everyone. What’s done is done. Can’t see anything being undone at this point. I figured if Pastor Tipton issued a statement that in itself is pretty significant and probably worth a mention.


----------



## A.Joseph

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Thanks for reeling this back in Lane. This is what I really think A.


No further thoughts on the video?


----------



## Smeagol

PuritanCovenanter said:


> What post are you referring to that Jeffrey Waddington made? Is it available?


See Post # 41


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

G said:


> See Post # 41


Thank You Grant. I missed that. Been trying to keep up on this between tasks. I also have to leave soon for Bible Study at Church. 

https://reformedforum.org/something-so-simple-i-shouldnt-have-to-say-it/

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

A.Joseph said:


> No further thoughts on the video?


No, I hope it is hidden for propriety and advancement so speculation and ill motive might not be advanced. I can understand sometimes why things are hid. Lane was correct and I have been trying to adhere to the same sentiments he is telling us to abide by. Obviously there is a problem. But we don't have the facts and we should be patient.


----------



## Smeagol

I think with Lane’s post, we have approached a good and fair stopping point.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

I think this is a good place to stop for right now. It is a good time to wait and be patient.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## kodos

It seems only fair to hear WTS' side of the story in the Tipton affair, since we have heard the other side from a prior (locked thread). Moderators feel free to lock immediately. It just seems that we shouldn't leave the other half of the story unreported.

The Seminary has responded.

https://www.wts.edu/2019/12/06/a-st...LmFh3IxGTjzFf86s3v3jLFg1CeGH1uF5g__hsNQyZmr2s

*A STATEMENT FROM DR. Peter LILLBACK*
December 6, 2019

Share: 
Dear Friends of Westminster,

I am writing today to speak on behalf of the leadership of Westminster Seminary. This is in response to the recent public announcement by Dr. Lane Tipton regarding the circumstances surrounding the ending of his tenure as a professor. Dr. Tipton has characterized our statement regarding the reason for the termination of his employment as not true. Suffice it to say that there was nothing untrue about our statement concerning the reasons for the termination of Dr. Tipton’s employment. We are confident that he is fully aware of the reasons for his dismissal. They were communicated to him at length prior to the Board of Trustees’ unanimous decision to end his employment, as was the seminary’s intention to report the reasons to Dr. Tipton’s presbytery. That communication to the Presbytery of Philadelphia has now been sent.

In reaching these difficult decisions, we are aware that there will be honest and difficult questions from our students, alumni, and friends. The seminary leadership laments the disappointment and confusion that the absence of desired information may cause amongst those who love Dr. Tipton and love the seminary. We are also aware that numerous opinions have been voiced about this matter in various forms of media. We know that some of those opinions assume knowledge of causes and impute motives that are inaccurate. The fact remains the unanimous action of the seminary’s board, composed of both OPC and PCA elders, was reached for just reasons all of which were fully communicated to Dr. Tipton.

Accordingly, we remain convinced that engaging in an online dispute about these matters will not produce the kind of clarity or resolution that is good for the church, the seminary, or anyone involved. Rather, we are persuaded that the patterns of speech prescribed for us in the Scriptures lead us, at this time, to say no more publicly than we have.

I conclude by humbly asking for your patience with the seminary’s processes, your trust where we are unable to provide you with the information you desire, and, especially, for your prayers as we seek to remain faithful to our King, and to the teaching and mission entrusted to us 90 years ago.

In Christ’s service,

Peter A. Lillback

President, Westminster Theological Seminary

Reactions: Like 1 | Amen 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress

Threads merged.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

