Overture to Rocky Mountain Presbytery

Discussion in 'Federal Vision/New Perspectives' started by BJClark, Jul 27, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BJClark

    BJClark Puritan Board Doctor

    Has everyone seen this? My pastor sent it to me this evening..

    He also sent me a copy of the Proposed Motion on FV for Gatekeeper Courts; that I will also post..

    Overture to Rocky Mountain Presbytery

    Whereas the 35th PCA General Assembly recommended the Federal Vision Study Committee Report as faithful to the Westminster Standards; and

    Whereas, the Westminster Standards while subordinate to the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, have been adopted by the PCA as the standard exposition of Scripture in relation to both doctrine and practice,

    Therefore be it resolved that Village Seven Presbyterian Church Session urge Rocky Mountain Presbytery to adopt the following recommended declarations as expressing the position of RMP on these issues; and

    Be it also resolved that Rocky Mountain Presbytery require candidates for licensure and ordination and ministers transferring into the Presbytery to declare their views with regard to the doctrines in these declarations; and

    Be it further resolved that if any member of the court is out of accord with these declarations, he should make his views known to the court per ordination vow 2.

    Declarations:

    1. The view that rejects the bi-covenantal structure of Scripture as represented in the Westminster Standards (i.e., views which do not merely take issue with the terminology, but the essence of the first/second covenant framework) is contrary to those Standards.

    2. The view that an individual is “elect” by virtue of his membership in the visible church; and that this “election” includes justification, adoption and sanctification; but that this individual could lose his “election” if he forsakes the visible church, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    3. The view that Christ does not stand as a representative head whose perfect obedience and satisfaction is imputed to individuals who believe in him is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    4. The view that strikes the language of “merit” from our theological vocabulary so that the claim is made that Christ’s merits are not imputed to his people is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    5. The view that “union with Christ” renders imputation redundant because it subsumes all of Christ’s benefits (including justification) under this doctrinal heading is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    6. The view that water baptism effects a “covenantal union” with Christ through which each baptized person receives the saving benefits of Christ’s mediation, including regeneration, justification, and sanctification, thus creating a parallel soteriological system to the decretal system of the Westminster Standards, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    7. The view that one can be “united to Christ” and not receive all the benefits of Christ’s mediation, including perseverance, in that effectual union is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    8. The view that some can receive saving benefits of Christ’s mediation, such as regeneration and justification, and yet not persevere in those benefits is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    9. The view that justification is in any way based on our works, or that the so-called “final verdict of justification” is based on anything other than the perfect obedience and satisfaction of Christ received through faith alone, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    Adopted by the Village Seven Presbyterian Church Session
    July 8, 2007
     
  2. BJClark

    BJClark Puritan Board Doctor

    Proposed Motion on FV for Gatekeeper Courts

    The following motion is being recommended for consideration by each Session and Presbytery. As gatekeeper courts Sessions and Presbyteries can adopt the declarations recommended by the 35th PCA GA Federal Vision Study Report as expressing the position of their courts. If you agree, please present it to your court for its consideration. Also, you may want to pass this recommendation to others.

    Recommended motion:

    That (Insert name of Session or Presbytery) adopt the following declarations recommended by the 35th PCA GA Federal Vision Study Committee Report as faithful to the Westminster Standards which, while subordinate to the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, have been adopted by the PCA as the standard exposition of Scripture in relation to both doctrine and practice; and

    That these declarations express the position of this court; and

    That the (Session or Presbytery) require candidates for licensure and ordination and ministers transferring into the Presbytery to declare their views with regard to the doctrines in these declarations; and

    That if any member of the court is out of accord with these declarations, he should make his views known to the court per ordination vow 2.

    Declarations:

    1. The view that rejects the bi-covenantal structure of Scripture as represented in the Westminster Standards (i.e., views which do not merely take issue with the terminology, but the essence of the first/second covenant framework) is contrary to those Standards.

    2. The view that an individual is “elect” by virtue of his membership in the visible church; and that this “election” includes justification, adoption and sanctification; but that this individual could lose his “election” if he forsakes the visible church, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    3. The view that Christ does not stand as a representative head whose perfect obedience and satisfaction is imputed to individuals who believe in him is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    4. The view that strikes the language of “merit” from our theological vocabulary so that the claim is made that Christ’s merits are not imputed to his people is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    5. The view that “union with Christ” renders imputation redundant because it subsumes all of Christ’s benefits (including justification) under this doctrinal heading is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    6. The view that water baptism effects a “covenantal union” with Christ through which each baptized person receives the saving benefits of Christ’s mediation, including regeneration, justification, and sanctification, thus creating a parallel soteriological system to the decretal system of the Westminster Standards, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    7. The view that one can be “united to Christ” and not receive all the benefits of Christ’s mediation, including perseverance, in that effectual union is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    8. The view that some can receive saving benefits of Christ’s mediation, such as regeneration and justification, and yet not persevere in those benefits is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

    9. The view that justification is in any way based on our works, or that the so-called “final verdict of justification” is based on anything other than the perfect obedience and satisfaction of Christ received through faith alone, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page