PCA intinction vote

[Mushroom]

Andrew, it is different from the examples that you cited because they were not overtures with the purpose of ending an existing practice.

Brother, the practice is in rebellion already. Do you need additional reproof than what is extant to convince? Why? What could possibly be the import of this innovation to drive you to such intransigence?

 

[Romans922]

Andrew, it is different from the examples that you cited because they were not overtures with the purpose of ending an existing practice.

Kevin, Theistic evolution is a case where there are people holding these views and teaching these views within the PCA. But I would tend to agree, I don't know of any who allow members who don't agree with the Apostle's Creed. So in the case of Theistic Evolution it is same.

 

[Marrow Man]

Theistic evolution is a case where there are people holding these views and teaching these views within the PCA.

Is this something that can be easily documented? I don't want to get into anything specific in a public forum, but I do know someone of note within the PCA announcing in an official setting that this was not a problem in the PCA and he knew of no one who held to the theistic evolution position (although I forget the exact way it was worded).

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Rich I would look at it like this.

Some congregations currently practice intinction. An overture was forwarded that would have ended this practice. The process resulted in the GA passing an amendment to the BCO that would have had this effect. If the presbyteries do not concur then we will return to the status quo ante. Or perhaps it is more accurate to say that nothing has changed.

In other words the practice of those churches will continue. i.e. intinction will be allowed.

Kevin,

You still haven't demonstrated that the rejection of an amendment is, ipso facto, the adoption of its opposite. Even a cursory understanding of our RAO and Robert's Rules makes that plain.

As you note, if defeated, the BCO remains unchanged. Our Constitution remains what it was before an amendment to it was proposed. No change to our Constitution will have been made with respect to a decision on propriety of intinction. Churches may continue to practice intinction but there is no amendment before the PCA to positively permit intinction and a Presbytery will still be allowed, under our Constitution, to exercise discipline as an exception to our Standards. Presbyteries will also still be permitted to reject a man for ordination whose views on the RPW, Liberty of Conscience, or Sacramentology are not in accord with our Standards.

 

[Kevin]

Rich do you know of a case where a man was denied ordination because of his views on intinction? Or do you know of a presbytery that considers it an exception to be declared?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Rich do you know of a case where a man was denied ordination because of his views on intinction? Or do you know of a presbytery that considers it an exception to be declared?

Yes.

 

[Kevin]

Rich do you know of a case where a man was denied ordination because of his views on intinction? Or do you know of a presbytery that considers it an exception to be declared?

Yes.

Was it a denial of ordination or an exception? And if an exception how did they handle it?

 

[NaphtaliPress]

And what if Rich says "not here"?

 

[Romans922]

Theistic evolution is a case where there are people holding these views and teaching these views within the PCA.

Is this something that can be easily documented? I don't want to get into anything specific in a public forum, but I do know someone of note within the PCA announcing in an official setting that this was not a problem in the PCA and he knew of no one who held to the theistic evolution position (although I forget the exact way it was worded).

If you read Wes White's blog there is significant documentation, links, etc. of Ron Choong, Tim Keller, and a few others who supported, espoused, and taught theistic evolution.

Also, Rachel Miller's blog here: A Daughter of the Reformation has some stuff.