Items tagged assembly

Westminster Assembly Project

Sun, 02 Mar 2008 06:02:32 GMT

Website worth your time:

Westminster Assembly Project

The Westminster Assembly Project exists to make the writings of the Westminster Assembly and its members available to scholars and to the general public. It is the umbrella title for several subprojects, one of which seeks to publish the minutes and papers of the Westminster Assembly. We hope that as this site develops it will prove useful for researchers focusing on Puritanism, the English civil-war, post-Reformation theology, or the history of Presbyterianism and Congregationalism.

PCA General Assembly Videos

Thu, 14 Jun 2007 21:31:49 GMT

Watch the live proceedings here (registration required) and the recorded proceedings here. It's a hight quality video and it's really nice! (via) Tags: PCA, General Assembly

A Pleasant Surprise in the PCA

Thu, 14 Jun 2007 10:05:14 GMT

I’m probably one of the few Baptists thankful for the vote in the PCA yesterday that overwhelmingly adopted their study committee report on the “Federal Vision” theology of Doug Wilson, Steve Schlissel, John Barach, Rich Lusk, Steve Wilkins, etc., declaring that their teaching does not conform to the Westminster Confession, and by implication, the scriptures. The PCA is not the first Presbytery to rule this way, but it is definitely the largest.

Why am I thankful? Because the Federal Vision, at its heart, is a denial of the gospel. It rejects the necessity of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to those who believe as the ground by which we are declared just before God. It replaces imputation with a mystical “union with Christ” that occurs at baptism; a union that is kept by the person’s “covenant faithfulness”; a union after which, one may still fall away. Without imputation, there is no “good news”; there is no gospel.

What does this mean practically? I don’t know. I hope that the men who teach this error will either repent or leave the PCA. If they hold to a Presbyterian ecclesiology, they must submit to the ruling and take one of these courses of action. I would even go so far to say that if we start seeing an exodus from the PCA, we may see many travel all the way back to Rome. Once you leave “Geneva”, there is only one destination. Pray the the Lord will purge this and other errors from His church.

Hopefully now, many who have turned a blind eye to the teachings of these men will cease their fawning over them. This is no small issue and many have treated it as such. Hopefully now they will realize that the doctrine of justification IS the doctrine by which “the church stands or falls.” It is one thing to quote Luther in this regard; it is quite another to take it seriously.

For those who are unfamiliar with the Federal Vision, here are the nine recommendations from the study report on why this theology should be rejected.

In light of the controversy surrounding the NPP and FV, and after many months of careful study, the committee unanimously makes the following declarations:

1. The view that rejects the bi-covenantal structure of Scripture as represented in the Westminster Standards (i.e., views which do not merely take issue with the terminology, but the essence of the first/second covenant framework) is contrary to those Standards.

2. The view that an individual is “elect” by virtue of his membership in the visible church; and that this “election” includes justification, adoption and sanctification; but that this individual could lose his “election” if he forsakes the visible church, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

3. The view that Christ does not stand as a representative head whose perfect obedience and satisfaction is imputed to individuals who believe in him is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

4. The view that strikes the language of “merit” from our theological vocabulary so that the claim is made that Christ’s merits are not imputed to his people is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

5. The view that “union with Christ” renders imputation redundant because it subsumes all of Christ’s benefits (including justification) under this doctrinal heading is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

6. The view that water baptism effects a “covenantal union” with Christ through which each baptized person receives the saving benefits of Christ’s mediation, including regeneration, justification, and sanctification, thus creating a parallel soteriological system to the decretal system of the Westminster Standards, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

7. The view that one can be “united to Christ” and not receive all the benefits of Christ’s mediation, including perseverance, in that effectual union is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

8. The view that some can receive saving benefits of Christ’s mediation, such as regeneration and justification, and yet not persevere in those benefits is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

9. The view that justification is in any way based on our works, or that the so-called “final verdict of justification” is based on anything other than the perfect obedience and satisfaction of Christ received through faith alone, is contrary to the Westminster Standards.

The Triumph of the Gospel

Thu, 14 Jun 2007 01:02:58 GMT

The report passed today by an overwhelming majority. Someone made a motion to postpone, so as to include exegetical discussion in the report, as well as add two members sympathetic to the FV. The motion was defeated by about a two to one majority. The recommendations themselves passed by approximately 95%. Indeed, that is probably a conservative estimate. It was a resounding triumph for the study committee report.

PCA GA Report on the FV/NPP

Wed, 13 Jun 2007 19:26:58 GMT

Watching the PCA GA Live.

Glossary: TE = Teaching Elder (minister); RE = Ruling elder.

1. TE Dr Paul Fowler, noted that the committee followed the charge given to it by the 34th general assembly. He gave a good clear summary of the charge given to the committee to relate the committee's conclusions to the Westminster Standards.

2. In summarizing the survey of the issues, TE Dr Ligon Duncan argued that the body should focus on the issues rather than on the process. He urged the body to see that clarity on the doctrines of salvation is essential to the well-being of the body.

3. T E Dr Sean Lucas surveyed and explained the nature and intent of the committee's declarations.

4. A ruling elder, whose name I missed, surveyed the committee's recommendations.

TE George Robertson rose to speak in favor of the report arguing that they fulfilled their mandate within the prescribed period, leaves the conversation at the Presbytery level, and that the committee has studied Scripture in the course of the report.

TE argued that the committee report failed to exegete scripture sufficiently. He admits that he voted in favor of the mandate of the 34th GA but faults the committee for doing what they were told to do, not what he thought it would do.

TE Joe Novenson moves a procedural motion to postpone action on the report:

1.Biblical Exegesis be added;
2. Positive lessons to be learned by the assembly be included;
3. Two additonal members, who are sympathetic to the NPP and FV be added to the committee.

T E John Day spoke in favor of the procedural motion on the ground that the FV/NPP were not represented in the committee and didn't present enough biblical exegesis.

T E Hutchinson opposed the procedure amendment on the ground that to refuse to speak now on these issues would place the PCA out of step with NAPARC churches.

T E Paul Gilchrist spoke in favor of the procedural amendment to postpone on the ground that the committee did not go primarily to Scripture and secondarily to the Standards. He appealed to the example of the PCA GA Study Committee as an example of a mixed committee that did exegesis first.

The body votes to extend the debate for 30 minutes.

T E Frank Barker speaks against the motion on the ground that the body knows and understands what the Scriptures teach on the doctrine of justification.

T E Ken Christian speaks for the motion on the ground that the persons and issues cannot be separated. To fail to include FV/NPP proponents would be grievous sin.

R E Lanting, speaks against the motion on the ground that the body is familiar with the teaching of the WCF which is the body's summary of Scripture. To fail to pass this would be do an injustice to God.

A substitute motion is offered, to give the committee the opportunity to come back to the opportunity to come back to the assembly with Scripture proofs. The moderator ruled this this out of order.

T E Howard Davis speaks in favor of the motion on two grounds: the body should follow the Spirit not NAPARC and the committee composition was unfair.

T E Dewey Roberts, speaks against the motion on the ground that the FV/NPP has been heard on the basis of their published works and the claim that the lack of inclusion of a minority is a smokescreen. To postpone discussion will give the error an opportunity to gain influence in the PCA. The PCA is too young not to speak clearly. The media will report that the PCA refused to speak to the doctrine of justification.

T E David Cassidy speaks in favor of the motion. Grounds: A year of "deepening conversation" on this matter will not lead the body into error. With the inclusion of a minority the body will be assured that the FV/NPP was accurately represented.

T E Steve McGee speaks against the motion, on the ground that the original assignment was good. The committee answered the question whether the the FV/NPP is out of accord with the standards. The body can erect a committee to do further biblical study.

T E Jeff White, speaks in favor of postponement on the grounds that we can have a better report that is more just and more charitable to the FV/NPP by adding a pro FV/NPP minority.

An elder speaks against the motion on the grounds that the Westminster Divines and PCA pastors have done the exegesis. His congregation will be confused by the assembly's failure to act.

An elder speaks in favor of the motion on the basis of the need for more biblical exegesis.

Nearly every speaker thus far has endorsed the conclusions (though a couple have not explicitly endorsed them) and recommendations of the committee.

TE R. C. Sproul speaks against the motion. The issue is imputation. The purity of the PCA is at stake. He said that he cannot understand the hesitancy. He spoke against adding a minority on the ground that it's like adding the accused to the jury. Applause and laughter. Before the moderator could gavel them down, R C said, "shame on you brothers for your righteous applause."

T E Craig Higgins, speaks in favor on the ground Francis Schaefer's dictum that we should never choose between an orthodoxy of doctrine and an orthodoxy of community. He argued that they are ministers in good standing, not accused. By having more participation we can have an orthodoxy of community without compromising our orthodoxy on justification.

Moderator remonstrates with the body for applauding the previous speaker.

Elder Wes Holland, speaks against. Grounds: We have 400 years of study and exegesis. We should uphold
the committee report. Churches are being divided and will be divided.

T E Harry Long, moves a substitute allowing the assembly to speak to the first four recommendations of the committee but also allowing the committee to add biblical exegesis. Motion ruled out of order.

Long speaks against the motion. Chair ruled that the substitute would be in order if the procedural motion fails.

Point of order. A T E complained that some speakers who were being recognized. The chair has been alternating between pro and con. Chair continues alternating speakers.

Elder from S E Louisiana Presbytery speaks for the motion on the ground that the report doesn't do enough with the standards or provide help for presbyteries. The most persuasive and recent FV views were not presented or represented on the committee.

T E speaks against the procedural motion. Grounds: On the grounds that the insistence that this committee do exegesis would produce a huge report. He's not hungry for further exegesis. He's satiated. It's dubious that the gospel has been misunderstood for 400 years and only now become clear. Touching the addition of members, challenges to doctrinal standards, that should be done in the courts of the church not in committees. If someone was denying the deity of Jesus, would they add him to a study committee in order to keep community? This report will not be those of the PCA but of those who wrote it and recommended as helpful by the PCA.

Debate ended.

The procedural motion is before the body.

The moderator notes that to put more than 7 members on an ad interim committee requires a super majority.

Paul Fowler is given the floor. He speaks against the motion, with affection for T E Novenson, on the grounds that the committee did what it was charged to do. The motion asks the committee to do what it was not charged to do. It is best to handle it now, due to the gravity of the issues. If the body needs a scriptural committee, that could be done.

The moderator made sure that the voting members were properly within the chambers for the purposes of voting.

The moderator prays.

The procedural motion is defeated overwhelmingly.

Speeches to the main motion continue.

T E Tom Cox defers to the microphone 10 (a little neglected).

Elder Dave Sarfolian (sp?) speaks in favor of the report. Grounds: last year the Missouri Presbytery did produce a consensus document as an overture from the MO Presbytery, part of which was authored by a proponent of the FV and it was found deficient and defeated.

Question from the floor, through the chair, to the committee: Were proponents of the FV/NPP contacted and did they agree that they accurately represented? The chair asks Dr Fowler to answer. The committee did discuss how to contact the FV/NPP proponents. 3 of the members had already contacted proponents during the consortium at Knox and in other media. They decided to deal primarily with printed and published documents. The committee believes that they understood clearly what the FV/NPP proponents are saying.

Debate ended.

The motion is before the body.

The motion carries overwhelmingly.

*I apologize if names were misspelled. I'm guessing in some cases.