Exactly, Rich. Would that leaders in individual congregations understood this as well!

__________________
Fred Greco
Senior Pastor, Christ Church PCA (Katy, TX)
Christ Church Blog

"The heart is the main thing in true religion...It is the hinge and turning-point in the condition of man's soul. If the heart is alive to God and quickened by the Spirit, the man is a living Christian. If the heart is dead and has not the Spirit, the man is dead before God." (J.C. Ryle)

Aye, aye, captain! i don't have any quarrel with your points about Exxon Valdeez or Haditha.

The thing is -- the FV ringleaders are no longer there, for the most part. They have removed themselves -- excommunicated themselves, if you will. The ultimate censure of church discipline has already been imposed.

What you are dealing with is a shifting majority. I too have asked -- how could anyone read what he wrote and not see it's out of line? The most credible answer I've gotten -- and I can't give you a link -- is that out of friendship, probably, certain commissioners just couldn't believe he meant just exactly what he said. I don't think any who previously gave him "a pass," as you aptly call it, did so conciously thinking they were letting him continue in his comfortable lifestyle at the expense of truth and sacrificing the sheep.

But the point is -- the thinking of a bare majority has crystalized to believe that his views were out of line.

So you, or more precisely, the SJC, is faced with deciding an appropriate punishment for a corporate body whose majority has shifted. The current majority agrees LaP was wrong all along to give him a pass.

Should you kick a presbytery out of the PCA when the current leadership agrees something is wrong, was wrong all along, and has already substantially purged itself of the error?

That is the sanction the SJC threatened in the indictment.

If you do, then you have the issue of men and families who've devoted their lives to advancing the Reformed Faith, opposing error, and will need somewhere else to go if they remain in the PCA. You have their churches that are structured very much around being presbyterian, which all of a sudden, by a stroke of the SJC pen, would no longer be presbyterian, and they would be in limbo for a year or more until some other presbytery took them in. Some of these churches have building programs, where they are deciding to place a substantial portion of their life savings in a presbyterian church, which all of a sudden may become an independent church. I know people, myself included, who have already wasted a lot of time and energy on independent churches, where a PCA church was not available to them.

These are some of the considerations the SJC has before it.

Hope this helps.

__________________

HaigLaw, ruling elder
Grace PCA, Shreveport, LA
http://www.xanga.com/HaigLaw

Something that gets lost in this is the impact on those who are never central to the controversy. You may never see them and they may be physically far away but are impacted by the decisions made by LaP. Those who are locally involved are more visible and we have a closer bond with them but we still have a responsibility to the entire Body of Christ to consider. That includes the proverbial struggling young Christian far away who is already being bombarded by errors taught by individualistic self important men. When we allow this thing to drag on they are effected as well. Let me say, had I been involved, I could never presume to declare that I would have gotten it right, but it is critical that the entire Body of Christ learn the lessons inherent in this entire fiasco. My prayers are with the PCA (my former Denom.) and the LaP. May God be glorified even in this.

__________________
How often have you wondered why Christ should set His heart upon such a one as you! --Octavius Winslow

Lon Wadkins (Jesup, Iowa)
New Covenant Fellowship, OPC
Independence, Iowa

Professing Christians of various flavors often operate by this maxim:

When in doubt, obfuscate.

Deal with the issues, brethren and pseudo-brethren. Don't muddy the waters with political rhetoric. This reproaches our Lord and shames him before the world.

I remain, disgusted,

Mike

__________________
Mike Renihan
~Pastor, Heritage Baptist Church, Worcester, MA, ARBCA
~Executive Director, Mission::Ireland, "Bringing the Reformation to the Emerald Isle one book at a time."
~Professor, Worcester State College, Dept. of History & Political Science
~Publisher, B & R Press, Auburn, MA
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend; inside of a dog, its too dark to read." --Groucho

I kind of understand this. It sort of highlights, however, and ought to be a warning to all leaders what the repurcusions are to self, family, and Church when a huge mistake is made.

I don't want to drag this out. It's not my decision to make and I'm quite glad it is not.

As a leader, however, I cannot simply conclude that all the leaders that have to be held accountable have "self-excommunicated" themselves. There was an examination where leaders called Wilkins' views as essentially Confessional. It's just the Marine in me, perhaps, but I think I have some Biblical warrant to say that accountability just doesn't end when a leader who failed to do it right the first time says they're sorry.

Whatever the motivations were that precipitated it are sort of immaterial to the thing at hand. If this case serves one powerful purpose it might serve to remind people of the longer term consequences of a wrong decision when it seems the shorter term consequences of seeming to hurt a brother are staring you in the face.

I can tell you this: that men who are in my line of profession would have been relieved of their duties - regardless of apology. That's tough but that's leadership. There's part of me that wants to not see men's lives turned upside down but then there's the part of me that wants to underline and boldface that Presbyters have got to stand up and face the music for the consequences of their decision. Perhaps self-sacrifice could be in order for men to step down in repentance and bring forward new leadership that had not had a serious lapse in judgement at the time of decision.

Again, just my opinion but this is one reason I've been waiting to accept the call for Elder with two opportunities to accept a call in the past because the responsibilities and consequences are so very, very grave.

__________________
Rich
PCA, Northern VA
Student, New Geneva Theological Seminary

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

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

Yes. We can't know the motivations for sure. One possibility is that the SJC indictment itself crystalized some elders' thinking. Maybe they previously thought it was a liberty of conscience issue on FV; that is -- I don't buy into this, but maybe it's OK as someone else's cup of tea. But when faced with being kicked out of the PCA over it, they took a second look and had to agree it was wrong. I think that is more likely than the speculation you had earlier that they were knowingly being soft on error out of financial considerations.

But the marines have unity of command, Rich. There is only one commander at each level. I don't think the PCA has any mechanism for relieving an elder of his position at the Presbytery level for participating in a bad decision. They just reverse the decision itself at the higher level. Apart from heresy or immorality on an individual elder's part, there is no punishing them other than reversal of the decision, for people voting the wrong way on a bad decision. And I think that is the way it must be, otherwise, you'd never have an end to litigation.

Yes, there is the warning to not let many be teachers, but if God is calling you, you need to accept the call, Rich.

Okay, doesn't make sense to me that they would excommunicate IF they are willing to be under accountability, okay, so they are asked to step down from leadership positions, does that mean they feel the NEED to be in leadership positions, merely because they have been leaders in the past?

one would think it would certainly bring a growth in Christ and an exercise in humilty to step down and remain in a non-leadership position.

However, if they are by my understanding of what your saying, imposing their OWN excommunication and removal from the PCA Church body, what does that tell others in the body if they are faced with Church discipline? That it is a joke and means absolutely nothing, because all you have to do is run to another denomation where you can become an elder or teacher there?? And what does it tell their own children when they make decisions and have need to discipline them? What if their own children fall into false beliefs and decide to leave for say the JW or LDS, what would make them believe they had the right to address them in that and expect they should listen or accept their discipline if need be?

And if they are truly examining themselves, then why walk away? Why not stay and face whatever consequences saying by action and word..."I have and am looking at my heart before God, and in that, there are consequences I must face, even if it means I am removed from leadership." That I believe would speak VOLUMES to not only those in the local body, but the extended body, and even the outside world that is watching.

The running away kind of reminds me of the RCC, where these men have been found molesting children, and they merely send them to another church body allowing them to molest other children, never holding them accountable before God and in there case men, as well for their crimes.

It is truly heart breaking that these men appear to think more of themselves and their "positions" of authority that they do not take the body into consideration and the impact their actions will have for Christ, in either direction, be it to dishonor His name or to bring it Glory.

HaigLaw,

Thanks again for the interaction.

No question the Marines are a completely different animal but the principle of accountability for decisions and the consequences to those under authority remains the same in the Church (See Joshua 9; 2 Samuel 21:1-14). The structure and the nature of authority is much different but the consequences of leadership are actually more far-reaching and dire in the Church. I'm not arguing, ultimately, that the SJC must set an example here. I simply wanted to uphold a Biblical principle on responsibility and accountability and that, sometimes, repenting certainly is appropriate and should be received but it doesn't releive one of the consequences.

Incidentally, the reason I didn't accept the call wasn't completely fear of the office but knowing I wasn't mature enough yet. It's sort of a thing where I understood the weight of the office and that I needed to grow to be able to serve in it. I do desire the office and am not running from it.

Thanks again for the interaction. I do hope you didn't feel like the Puritanboard was putting you on trial. I was really just trying to talk it out. Please forgive me if it ever seemed I was implying that you were acting dishonorably or un-Confessionally.

Blessings!

Rich

Not at all, Rich. But there have been times here I wondered whether I was making myself clear. Either unclear, or some readers may have been slow to get it. Just as some commissioners to the LaP were slow to get it, on the implications of FV.

Cheers, -Dave

Well, now, my friend, now that the decision is in, do you feel enough punishment was meted out?

I would also point out that many of the ones who conciously defended Federal Vision have already run for cover. Most of the ones left in the majority now in the presbytery are the ones who were trying to deal with the errors all along.

There is some confusion over at Green Baggins now over the prosecutor trying to read into the official report things that are not there, but I've called his hand on it.

As one who bears a lot of authority every day of my working life --
as you have -- I fear there are some in our church courts who get a little authority and try to exercise it regardless of what the facts are. We all need to remember the warning -- let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall. 1 Cor. 10:12.

As it was in the authority of the committee to make that decision, I have no problem with it. I was merely making an observation and expressing an opinion with all the authority that it carried (which was none).

I was happy, in the main, that the LaP "saw the light" but I still believe that there was an error in judgement that ought to be acknowledged as serious whether or not it carries a penalty with it.

Blessings!

Rich

I suppose this is old news now and discussed ad infinitim on Greenbaggins, so I won't belabor it further here other than saying "thanks" to Semper Fi again.

Is there an update? I don't see a link.

__________________
The man who is disposed to think of his sin as a great calamity, rather than as a heinous crime, is not likely either to reverence God or to respect His law. - John Kennedy, 1873
Meg
Blog
Member, Intown Presbyterian Church,PCA, Portland, OR

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

No; the LaP has not even met since the SJC decision.

I will keep everybody posted when something happens.

Those of us active with the LaP will probably be focusing on our GA committee work coming up in June in Dallas.

But thanks for asking.

I started a new thread on PB about the LaP meeting of today, April 19, and discuss it fully on my Xanga blog.