Originally Posted by Psalm 28:7

The Lord is my Strength and my shield; in Him my heart trusts, and I am helped; my heart exults, and with my song i give thanks to Him.

Originally Posted by KMK

I assume you only want Presbyterians/Anglicans to vote...

Originally Posted by shackleton

100% would mean believing that the Pope is the Antichrist. That and some of the things concerning the law and worship I am not on board 100%.

-----Added 3/29/2009 at 03:52:32 EST-----

Anglicans...? I did not think they were confessional.

Originally Posted by charliejunfan

the original

Originally Posted by whitway

I subscribe to the 1788 WCF which is the Confession of the OPC and PCA.

Originally Posted by etexas

For some reason I thought there was a difference in the OPC and PCA WS??? Was there at some point, or am I totally confused?

Originally Posted by whitway

If there was I'm not aware of it.

Originally Posted by whitway

If there was I'm not aware of it.

Originally Posted by etexas

No worries! Just a dumb Anglican! Actually I am friends with both OPC and a PCA Pastors in town, I can check it with one of those guys.

Originally Posted by NaphtaliPress

There are some minor differences I'm thinking; the one that pops to mind is that the PCA did not formally adopt the scripture proofs (the PCUSA ones).

Originally Posted by whitway

I subscribe to the 1788 WCF which is the Confession of the OPC and PCA.

Originally Posted by Edward

I'm not sure that is exactly correct.

See American Revisions to the Westminster Confession of Faith

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

So basically the OPC and PCA do not require adherence to the Confession anyway.

And what exactly is the system of doctrine that you do have to adhere to if you take an exception to the Confession.

I thought the Confession was THE System of Doctrine.

Since no one has defined exactly what the System of Doctrine is, some general concept of the 5 point soteriology, it leaves it pretty loose.

In fact I heard of one minister being ordained in the PCA after taking an exception to limited atonement a few years back.

So if the BOCO overrides the Confession and says you don't have to believe in the entire Confession, just the system of doctrine, why don't they just get rid of the Confession and just write up what the minimum for unity really is, the system of doctrine and then everyone adhere to that?

In the OPC they don't even have to record their exceptions so they can change them regularly with no discipline or oversight. At least the PCA makes the effort to say lets get the man on record of what he doesn't agree with so he can't go anywhere else without letting us know.

Why not just for unity sake, submit to the entire Confession or amend it again until enough agree?
Effectively you do that with exceptions and in the OPC it has the precise theological term wiggle room. And again a allusion to the system of doctrine contained in the Confession.

Wow if I said I believe the Bible contains the word of God I am not sure my pastor would let me be a member. I know its not the same but ....

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

Reply to Whitway
Well how can it not be until we go to full and strict subscription to something

There is no way to discipline anyone as long as they say well I except that. And I hold to the 5 points and predestination.

That becomes our Confession defacto right?

So amend it or submit to it I say. You amended it once, unenecessarily in MHO because they did not understand the purpose of the king calling a day to make sure the wars stopped and there was peace to have a GA, and I guess there is no real need to say the POPE is the antiChrist but hey its not a big deal to say he is either.

Anyway can you imagine what the amendment would look like if we tried to do one today ???
Look how much work it takes to amend the BOCO or figure out what is errant in Federal vision.

So I say to avoid the sin of disunity, which has to be as bad as saying the pope is the antiChrist, just submit to it!!

Love you brother in the battle !!
PS I was in the OPC for 10 years and went to Pres and GA most of the time

Originally Posted by whitway

Thanks Don! I've been in the PCA for about 10 years myself and in the OPC for just a few weeks although I've visited a few OPC churches over the years. I think both have their strong points as well as opportunities. I wouldn't claim that the OPC is the "Only Perfect Church" like some do.

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

Wow you don't even know what you are in for then. Have some off line chats with Pastor Glenn Farrel of Boise. He is like minded to me and has only been in OPC since 05 and he is shocked in the NW pres. So its not the same everywhere.

They are about to split in 3 pieces not just 2. The BT Kleininan crowd is building forces.

But on paper, they were maybe the best church. But not mine. too loose on discipline and against applicatory preaching. Over the top BT

I hope they go back to what Machen was.

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

So basically the OPC and PCA do not require adherence to the Confession anyway.

That's not an accurate characterization.

With regard to the PCA, every "statement and/or proposition" of the standards must be vowed as understood and received as a faithful summary of the doctrine of Scripture unless a peer-reviewed “exception” is granted (to a particular 'non essential' statement/proposition).


And what exactly is the system of doctrine that you do have to adhere to if you take an exception to the Confession.

I thought the Confession was THE System of Doctrine.

No.

The Westminster Standards (not only the Confession) are taken to summarize a system of doctrine contained in Scripture.

Every statement or proposition might not be absolutely essential to the system as a whole. Understand also that the Standards are not intended to summarize all doctrine in the Scripture.

That’s why semantics differences, for example, are recognized. A proposition, for example, about light recreation of the Sabbath might, in the judgment of some presbyteries, not be “essential.” (Other presbyteries might not grant that).

Since no one has defined exactly what the System of Doctrine is, some general concept of the 5 point soteriology, it leaves it pretty loose.

The Westminster Standards do contain a summary of (some, but not all) doctrine of Scripture, but that doesn’t mean that “difference” with one single statement or proposition in it would necessarily defeat the entire system.


In fact I heard of one minister being ordained in the PCA after taking an exception to limited atonement a few years back.

I don't think so. The limited atonement and infant baptism long ago were protected by church court precedent.

Quote:

http://www.pcahistory.org/documents/...rncarolina.pdf

So if the BOCO overrides the Confession and says you don't have to believe in the entire Confession, just the system of doctrine, why don't they just get rid of the Confession and just write up what the minimum for unity really is, the system of doctrine and then everyone adhere to that?

The “BOCO” does not say “you don’t have to believe the entire Confession, just the system of doctrine…” Not sure where you are getting that.

Nor does the Book of Church Order “override” the Confession. [Our Book of Church Order is often referred to by the acronym BCO]

The constitutional standards are subject to and subordinate to Scripture:

In the OPC they don't even have to record their exceptions so they can change them regularly with no discipline or oversight. At least the PCA makes the effort to say lets get the man on record of what he doesn't agree with so he can't go anywhere else without letting us know.

Someone more familiar with the OPC system can respond to this. My understanding of the OPC standard of subscription is not at all as you describe it here. If anything, their standard may be even slightly more protective.

Why not just for unity sake, submit to the entire Confession or amend it again until enough agree?

Not sure what you mean.

Someone granted an 'exception' still submits to the Standards, not as a matter of belief in that statement/proposition, obviously, but in practice.

Effectively you do that with exceptions and in the OPC it has the precise theological term wiggle room. And again a allusion to the system of doctrine contained in the Confession.

Not at all. It provides a mechanism for peer reviewed, minimalist exceptions in every generation. Presbyterianism has done this historically ["scruples"]

Wow if I said I believe the Bible contains the word of God I am not sure my pastor would let me be a member. I know its not the same but ....

You're right- your example here is not the same at all.

Originally Posted by charliejunfan

So is the WPCUS the only Presby Denom in the US to hold to the original Standards then?

Originally Posted by charliejunfan

So is the WPCUS the only Presby Denom in the US to hold to the original Standards then?

Originally Posted by whitway

This only clarifies that the OPC did not accept the 1903 additions "Of the Holy Spirit" and "Of the Love of God and Missions" and a Declaratory Statement softening the Confession's position on Election. This was added by the PCUSA so in effect they returned to the 1788 Revision as it was originally.

Originally Posted by Joshua

No. In addition to Pastor King's info, the Reformed Presbyterian Church General Assembly has as its standards the original Westminster Confession of Faith.