I'm so glad to hear this, because it causes all sorts of problems over here in Australia.

That was not the direction of my original post and I'm not really interested in going through the WCF. The point at hand was over definition. For example, there are many reformed folks who can adhere to the 3FU but not the WCF (for example). I find this sad because these are reformed believers who have so much in common, who belong together, and who should be unified in keeping with who we are in Christ. The many reformed denominations we have is not in keeping with the original Puritan vision. Why is it that we're not working more at unity?

__________________
Marty

From Creation to New Creation via Redemption

The pope as the antichrist is a popular one that people recognize as being removed...but...a less common one is this:


Original:
American (OPC):
To some people this is not a minor change.

Sorry if this is off topic, I just wanted to point it out.

Note: Daniel Ritchie...What do you think of this "minor" change? Do you deal with this section of the confession in your new book at all?

__________________
Shawn Atkins
Member, Parkhill Presbyterian Church (OPC)
Denver, Colorado

Open my eyes Lord, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law. Psalm 119:18

I do deal with the American's omission of the Establishment Principle from the WCF in Chapter 3 of A Conquered Kingdom "National Confessionalism and the Establishment Principle". That particular clause is not considered, but my overall argument would have some bearing on it.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

Thanks...

Is this book in stock and ready to ship? Can I order it directly from the Lulu web site and have it in a week or two do you know?

Yes, you will get one a couple of weeks after you place the order.

I just ordered it and I'm looking forward to the read.

Hello Marty,

This perked my ears. I think of know what you are talking about, but could you elaborate on what you mean by "mono-covenantal" and why you say such is the position of the 3FU?

I don't want to chime in until I am clear on what you are saying.

__________________
Rev. Daniel R. Hyde
Pastor, Oceanside United Reformed Church
www.oceansideurc.org
Carlsbad/Oceanside, California

Good point. If I remember correctly, the issue of the civil magistrate was something that the Church of Scotland was not too thrilled with when the Standards were first ratified and allowed an exception for. Therefore it was changed in the American version to reflect this standard exception.

__________________
~Wayne Wylie~
Member, Mid Cities Presbyterian Church (OPC)
Ruling Elder - Inactive
http://www.mcopc.org
Bedford, TX

Job 28:28 - And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding.

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Here is a concrete example. I recently attended a PCA presbytery meeting where two candidates were examined. One was a transfer from another presbytery and the other was for ordination. I'll note at the outset that the 2nd candidate that I discuss below probably wouldn't have gotten out of committee, much less been ordained by some PCA presbyteries. The PCA has much greater degree of diversity from presbytery to presbytery than many other confessionally Reformed churches.

The one who transferred said he was taking an exception on the Sabbath. I'm not sure what was determined in the end, but some of the elders expressed the opinion that this candidate's scruples were so minor that it may not be necessary for him to take an exception.

The candidate for ordination took 4 exceptions. These exceptions were the prohibition of depictions of Christ, the Sabbath, paedocommunion and the prohibition of marrying papists (WCF 24.3). Under further questioning he also stated that he didn't think the term evangelical in the BCO precluded Roman Catholics from partaking in communion in PCA churches since they "hold to the essentials of the faith." This man ministers in a city with probably one of the heaviest RC concentrations in the USA. Not being an elder nor a member of the presbytery, I wasn't privy to the discussions and votes in executive session, so I don't know what was decided regarding whether or not he could teach any or all of these exceptions. His ordination was approved by the overwhelming majority of elders present.

__________________
Chris Poe--Attending Grace Community Baptist Church, Mandeville, LA

"There never was a man in the world without a creed. What is a creed? A creed is what you believe. What is a confession? It is a declaration of what you believe. That declaration may be oral or it may be committed to writing, but the creed is there either expressed or implied."—B.H. Carroll

It is unfortunate that they did ordain that gentlemen.

__________________
Benjamin P. Glaser
Pittsburgh, PA
Fairmount ARP Church
Student of Theology
Pittsburgh Theological Seminary
Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary
My Blog

"Man's attempt to enter heaven on his own terms places him instead in hell." -- R.J. Rushdoony

A little off topic, but how could a man who is to preach the whole counsel of God not teach or preach on what he believes Scripture teaches? Does he just skip those portions of Scripture?

I don't know what the official PCA position on exceptions is or if there even is a clear rule, but some will argue that a Teaching Elder cannot teach his exceptions while others will strongly argue that they can teach them provided they explain that their view on the subject at hand is contrary to the standards. Or do presbyterys have to decide on a case by case basis whether the exception can be taught? Perhaps someone more familiar with the PCA Book of Church Order and any rulings on this issue could weigh in.

Here is a LINK to the Bowen case.

Yes, sorry Danny, I guess it was a bit of an ambiguous statement with the terminology chosen.

My point was simply that the WCF explicitly teaches the covenant of works (hence 2 covenants taught), whereas the 3FU doesn't (only one covenant taught). I wasn't trying to say that the 3FU isn't compatible with a covenant of works.

However, I do know people who can't affirm the WCF because of it's teaching about the covenant of works, but can affirm the 3FU.

Blessings bro.