Kevin
Puritan Board Doctor
Here is Sam's follow up to his earlier article about the PCA and the possibility of a split. So You Don’t Want a PCA Split? | Vintage73.com
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nope, don't want a split. But I would like to see those men who have invaded our denomination for whatever reason despite their differences with our standards, who want to introduce novelties and 're-interpretations', find the decency and integrity to leave rather than fracture it.
Is that what it is? I always wondered...That must be it Brad, men are coming to the PCA for the high pay!
If some of these men are seeking to be faithful to Scripture, yet in doing so find themselves in disagreement with our Confession, then it is better that they depart than fracture the denomination, because it is evident they have come to different conclusions as to what the Scriptures teach. Disagreement may be inevitable, but division and disobedience are not acceptable behaviors for Churchmen.Nope, don't want a split. But I would like to see those men who have invaded our denomination for whatever reason despite their differences with our standards, who want to introduce novelties and 're-interpretations', find the decency and integrity to leave rather than fracture it.
For myself, I am always saddened to see men who seek to be faithful to Scripture leave to join a denomination perceived as more liberal than our own.
If some of these men are seeking to be faithful to Scripture, yet in doing so find themselves in disagreement with our Confession, then it is better that they depart than fracture the denomination, because it is evident they have come to different conclusions as to what the Scriptures teach.
Brad,
I think you need to watch out, when you say generally there are men who:"introduce novelties and 're-interpretations'"
Are you refering to them preaching another gospel?
Or are we talking about how the gospel is explained?
Couldn't it be just a likely that those who see things like you do need to consider finding a more conservative denomination?
“Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses.” (1 Timothy 5:19, ESV)
“Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.” (1 Corinthians 4:5, ESV)
let the Presbyteries do their job, and accept their decision, if you can't accept the authority placed over you, then that is a different problem...
When someone starts a line with "with all due respect"... it tends to come off as angry.
my point was - its dangerous to simply throw around vague accusations. Who are these men? What are the charges? Are there cooperating testimonies?
Then let the Presbyteries do their job, and accept their decision, if you can't accept the authority placed over you, then that is a different problem...
Randy I can point to equal "benefits" in the RPCNA.
Im not sure how much of this has anything to do with my article.
Why, Sam, I certainly appreciate your warm concern for my soul - I'll definitely be 'watching out' as a result of this warning.Brad,
I think you need to watch out, when you say generally there are men who:"introduce novelties and 're-interpretations'"
What things exactly are you talking about that I and others 'see'? That we are a Confessional Church, and when one defies that Confession in teaching or praxis one is being divisive and disobedient? That is the definition of 'conservative'? Hmmm... I thought it was simply... the truth. But I defer to your rank.Couldn't it be just a likely that those who see things like you do need to consider finding a more conservative denomination?
Oh, Sam, thank you so much again for reminding me of this. I had almost forgot it. I've heard it enough, though. Especially from the mouths of a long list of TE's and RE's that have gone on to various errors and apostasies after having foisted their personal power peccadillos upon my family and my Church. The tendency was usually to see the laity as a mushroom farm; keep 'em in the dark, feed 'em manure, and when they poked their heads up, chop 'em off. And many a man who would make merchandise of the people of God has preferred that method. I could send you a list, but it would be pointless. The real point is that experience has well taught me not to blindly follow or accept the validity of those 'callings'. Having done so in the past has cost my family dearly. I determine to "know them by their fruit". I don't make charges against individuals any more, that's a whole 'nother set of machinations that breaks my heart to have to witness. But I will express my observations, and if the shoe fits, well, too bad. Experience has also shown that those who protest the loudest are usually the ones who are engaged in the behavior mentioned.Two Scriptures to consider:
“Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses.” (1 Timothy 5:19, ESV)
“Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.” (1 Corinthians 4:5, ESV)
if teaching FV is a denominational offense
Brad,
I think you need to watch out, when you say generally there are men who:"introduce novelties and 're-interpretations'"
Are you refering to them preaching another gospel?
Or are we talking about how the gospel is explained?
Couldn't it be just a likely that those who see things like you do need to consider finding a more conservative denomination?
Two Scriptures to consider:
“Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses.” (1 Timothy 5:19, ESV)
“Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.” (1 Corinthians 4:5, ESV)
we are a Confessional Church
Another victory for the compromisers, in my insignificant estimation. If we are not Confessional, why do we have a Confession?Are we? Constitutionally, we don't really require adherence to our constitution.
There is a testimony that breaks my heart. Christianity shouldn't be a thing where the jaded older adherents get a feeling of 'boy, are you in for an eye-opening experience' for the novices. I can remember the shock I had when I learned that so many of our leadership rejected so much of the Standards our denomination claimed to hold. I came to the Reformed faith in part due to the consistency of it both to Scripture and practice. That bubble was burst a long time ago. What a shame.Please pardon my ignorance everyone, but I really don't understand why we're having this conversation, nor why it was even started. I have been reformed for 4 years, and I became reformed outside of any reformed denomination, it was only by the grace of God. It was a while before I knew any truly reformed brethren and even longer before we settled into a faithful, reformed church. I studied everything I could get my hands on, learned the reformed confessions, understood the reformed ecclesiology and have great love and respect for both. I spent 30 years on the other side and almost gave up on the faith because of it. I understand the need for confessions, creeds and standards.
If you're denomination has confessional standards and a book of church order it adheres to, then why are we talking about this? I'm not trying to pick a fight, but this seems to be a waste of time. Why be in the PCA if you can't adhere to the historic, reformed confessions that frame it? Am I missing something? Please help me understand the PCA brothers, it doesn't quite match in practice what I learned in "theory".
Are you willing to recognize that the PCA can’t be static?
Here is the reality, I’m not the smartest young guy in the denomination, (not by a long shot) and if I’m asking questions about the future of the PCA, you can be sure that many others are asking them as well. Everyone must realize that many of the men becoming pastors and elders in the PCA don’t have the same history as a generation before. We didn’t fight for the PCA, nor were all of us born into the PCA, it was something that we came to. This means that our relationship isn’t hard-fought, and it wasn’t handed to us by our fathers and grandfathers. Yet, even without those things we deeply care about the PCA. It isn’t the only Church, but it is the church where Christ has placed us. To my older Brothers and Fathers, are you will to trust men who are young enough to be your children, or even grandchildren? They will not make the same decisions as you, but are you willing to grow old in the PCA with other men taking up the helm? If the answer is no, we will see the PCA fracture. To those younger men, let me ask you: