Musings of a Bystander

My denomination, the PCA, is holding its annual General Assembly this week. Later today the PCA Study Committee report on the Federal Vision/Auburn Avenue Theology and New Perspective on Paul will be presented.

For those still trying to catch up on the debate, here are some last minute links:

• The committee's report itself (pdf file)
• An argument presenting 30 reasons not to adopt or accept the report
• One blogger's response to those 30 reasons
• An open letter from some PCA pastors recommending the report not be adopted (pdf file)
• Another open letter recommending adoption of the report

Those with a keen eye will find my name (humbly) added to the latter document.

Not that I am anybody, but I have followed the Federal Vision issue since the first conference held at Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church in Monroe, LA. At first the negative reaction and controversy surrounding it seemed like a tempest in a teapot. I sympathized then, and still do so now, with some of the concerns raised by those in the Federal Vision camp.

However, after reading the papers presented at the Knox Colloquiam (back before they were published in a book and available online), and continuing to try to read and follow the various arguments back and forth, I have come to be convinced that the Federal Vision theology is inconsistent with our doctrinal standards. More specifically, I believe the concerns expressed by Federal Vision advocates (such things as emphasis on covenant, the sacraments, the necessity of good works, and others) are well addressed by our historic doctrines as expressed in the Westminster Standards, and need no revision.

As my title indicates, I harbor no malice toward those in the Federal Vision camp, but respectfully believe that their doctrines do not fit in with the doctrines of the PCA. Their beliefs fit in better elsewhere.

I am not able to attend the General Assembly this year, but will follow the news with interest, and hope to catch the discussion and debate on the Study Committee Report on the GA webcast.

Labels: Calvinism, PCA

Posted by Martin at 12:11 AM | Permalink | Comments

That's the surprising contention Heiko Oberman makes in his wonderful biography of Martin Luther. Thinking about the post below reminded me of a couple paragraphs in the book where Oberman describes Luther's view of Scripture and how it impacted the Reformation:

...The Reformation reached the people because of a surprising conclusion Luther drew from the scriptural principle he had known for so long: the Scriptures must be preached! Because heresies threatened the living apostolic message, it had to be recorded in a book to protect it from falsification. Preaching reverses this process of conservation again, allowing the Scriptures of the past to become the tidings of the present.

So the Bible is a necessary evil! It is necessary because without it man's spirit will claim to be holy and there will be no way of proving him wrong. Scripture becomes "evil" when, as a hollow pontifical document, it petrifies in holiness instead of being publicly proclaimed in the Church as the living Word. The Gospel has been committed to lifeless paper; fresh words can transform it into glad tidings again.

Heiko Oberman, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil, pp. 173-174

There is a lot that is provocative in those two paragraphs.

But what is especially striking to me is the last sentence. We hear a lot about how important the printing press was to the spread of the Protestant Reformation and the ideas written down on paper by Luther and others, and then copied all over Europe. This is no doubt true.

Nevertheless, I think Oberman is right in ascribing much of the "energy" behind the Reformation to the preaching of the Word. Men, some supremely gifted by the Spirit and some just determined to preach Christ and whose names we'll probably never know, opened up God's Word to a world of dead, dry bones and the Spirit took that preached Word and brought those bones to life. The "fresh words" of the preachers proclaimed the living Word, and it did not return to God empty, but instead accomplished a truly great thing in bringing true revival to so much of Europe.

Today we get all excited about the internet and its remakable ability to communicate with people, and the amazing avenues of communication that are opened up to regular folks (like me!). Some churches are all energized about the latest sound and video equipment in their services, drama presentations and "relevant" music.

The internet truly is an incredible tool, and I think it has and will have a positive impact. But neither it nor AV equipment nor drama nor music nor Powerpoint and movie clips can replace the simple, yet powerful, preaching of God's Word.

I hope and pray that the current mini-revival of Reformed theology is not merely an intellectual recovery of these Biblical truths (with the Bible as an "evil," hollow theological document?), but that it is the kind of movement like that of almost 500 years ago, where faithful preachers captured the exciting, amazing, saving grace of the Word and through such ordinary means the Spirit brought new life to a dying world.

Labels: Calvinism, Church History, Ordinary Means

Posted by Martin at 11:14 PM | Permalink | Comments

In re-reading the Christianity Today article on the new young Reformed movement I was struck - again - by the last two paragraphs.

Joshua Harris - the author of I Kissed Dating Goodbye and now a pastor - is quoted in those paragraphs. Harris describes his Reformed views as a "humble orthodoxy" and is described by the author as someone who "reluctantly debates doctrine, but he passionately studies Scripture and seeks to apply all its truth." And then the final paragraph:

"If you really understand Reformed theology, we should all just sit around shaking our heads going, 'It's unbelieveable. Why would God choose any of us?'" Harris said. "You are so amazed by grace, you're not picking a fight with anyone, you're just crying tears of amazement that should lead to a heart for lost people, that God does indeed save, when he doesn't have to save anybody."

Harris' point of view resonates strongly with me. I'm not so keen on debate myself, but do love to discuss theology. It's not that theology shouldn't be debated, but I've realized I'm not the best guy for that task. I'm very thankful for men like the faculty at Westminster Seminary in California who are willing to stand firm for the truths of the Reformed faith. I'm also very thankful for the various men on sessions, in presbytery, or at General Assembly who have the giftedness to understand the intricacies of church polity and make sure we do it right.

My joy - what gets me energized - is teaching and hopefully someday regularly preaching the truths of God's Word, and helping people understand the truly amazing grace that is revealed to us in the work of salvation accomplished for us by God in Christ through the work of the Spirit.

Labels: Calvinism, Church Planting

Posted by Martin at 10:53 PM | Permalink | Comments

Dr. Scott Clark over at The Heidelblog has a very, very, very, very, very, very important post on faith and how seriously the Federal Vision theology gets it wrong.

Read it.

Don't have time? Make time.

Labels: Calvinism, Church History, PCA

Posted by Martin at 11:11 AM | Permalink | Comments

For those who are searching...

Louisiana Presbytery of the PCA recently posted the following on its web site:

On January 20, 2007, Louisiana Presbytery, exercising its authority and prerogative under BCO 31-2, passed the following motion pertaining to TE Steve Wilkins:

"Louisiana Presbytery, after thorough examination and investigation of TE Steve Wilkins as per the SJC directives regarding allegations made in the Central Carolina Presbytery Memorial, finds no strong presumption of guilt in any of the charges contained therein and exercises its prerogative not to institute process regarding those allegations." [Clerk's note: See BCO 31-2.]

"Grounds: See the written exam and oral exam of TE Steve Wilkins on December 9, 2006."

Personally I am not surprised by this decision, though admit I am disappointed.

I have no idea where this controversy will go from here, but will be surprised if it isn't a major issue at our General Assembly later this year.

I may write more later, but one quick thought: I don't understand why people whose views are (it seems to me) clearly out of alignment with historical Presbyterian doctrine would want to stay in a Presbyterian denomination. Why not leave peaceably? The PCA has no claim on their property. Why prolong the controversy, and how does doing so conform with the vow all elders take to uphold the peace and purity of the church? Baffling...

Labels: Calvinism, PCA

Posted by Martin at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments

I seem to get a lot of search hits related to Pastor Steve Wilkins and the investigation into his doctrine by the PCA. Here are a couple updates for readers to look into:

Steve Wilkins' response to questions raised,

An analysis of that response.

When the first Auburn Avenue conference was held and there was an initial flurry of reaction to it, the whole thing struck me as a tempest in a teapot. It seemed like people were talking past each other, and that critics were finding error where none was intended.

However, when the second conference was held it became clear that there was significant error, and my conviction that it is error has only increased as I've continued to follow the controversy. I read all the papers presented at the Knox Seminary colloquiam, and have read much (but certainly not all) of what has been written since.

What bothers me about this are two things. One is that, while I am very sympathetic to many of the concerns raised by the Federal Vision people I wish they could see that the answers to their questions are in our Reformed confessions and creeds already. Reformed theology already addresses their concerns, and doesn't need to be changed. This leads to the second concern, that in trying to "reform" Reformed theology they have changed it into something which it is not, and have created a theological system that is - in my very humble opinion - anti-biblical.

In addition, I am baffled that people who believe something different than what the Westminster Standards teach would want to continue to maintain that they are faithful to that teaching, and remain in a denomination that holds to those standards. But then I remember my church history, and that this seems to be the consistent M.O. of those who teach error. They try to argue that they are orthodox, outwardly affirm their agreement with creeds or confessions of faith, and then teach that which is contrary to those standards.

Labels: Calvinism, PCA

Posted by Martin at 7:32 AM | Permalink | Comments

In the art world there is a fascinating painting technique called Pointillism. Founded and popularized by Georges Seurat, it uses small points or dots of paint to create the larger image. Color TV's and printers use a similar approach to create an image. Probably the most famous of all Pointillist paintings is Seurat's Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte.

Here's some detail from the painting La Parade by Seurat:

(Click on the image to see the full painting.)

Notice how the colors and overall image change as you view the full painting.

Why I thought of this I don't know, but I think there is something similar that happens in theology.

I've met folks who passed through the doors of Reformed churches and left for Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism. Their reasons vary, but a common theme is that Reformed theology doesn't capture "X" aspect of Biblical teaching well. The corollary is that Reformed theology focuses too much on "Y."

While I might disagree with these folks' reactions, analysis and understanding of Reformed theology, there is something to what they say.

Reformed theology loves its Pointillist dots. Seurat the painter was fascinated by theories of light and color. Each dot in his paintings had precision and a purpose. We in Reformed circles also love our dots. We're fascinated by theological precision and accuracy. We want to know not only that we are justified sinners, but also in detail what justification is -- and isn't. It's important to us that salvation is sola fide, but also that sola fide is sola fide.

But we can't lose the overall picture. I don't think we intend to, and more than that I don't think a full and careful reading of Calvin or any other Reformed theologian can miss the big picture that is there.

Nevertheless when new believers, or believers new to Reformed theology come into our midst, we often - maybe far too often - give the impression that all we care about are picky little details. We need to remind ourselves, and especially remind those new to our ranks, that there is a bigger picture, that when you step back from all the wonderfully detailed dots that make up Reformed theology what you get is an amazing picture of the work that God has accomplished for and applied to us poor sinners.

Labels: Calvinism

Posted by Martin at 10:44 AM | Permalink | Comments

Continuing discusion of the second principle: justification.

Previous posts:

Three Principles
God at Work
Scripture is Enough
A Happy Change and Sweet Exchange
Justification - So What?

My first post emphasized the realities expressed in the first two sub-points on justification, that God declares believers forgiven of all their sins because Jesus bore their guilt and penalty on the cross, and that God also declares believers righteous on the basis of having Christ's righteousness credited, or imputed, to their account. This is the sweet exchange of the good news of the Gospel.

The second post on justifiction was a short reflection on the fourth sub-point's two first two sub-points, that understanding justification properly helps us understand and live in the knowledge that God accepts us based on Christ's work, not our own, and that this is the foundation for all the believer's life. A sound understanding of justification helps us avoid both pride and despair; pride in our own "superior" works (or "superior" knowledge of theology), or despair flowing from our accute sense of our own inadequacy.

Here I will try to briefly wrap up the remaining ideas outlined under this second principle.

A key point is that, "Justification springs from God's free grace and is received by faith alone." The Reformed University Ministries instructors emphasized that this principle is foundational for the teaching and preaching of the campus ministries. Young Christians, especially in the South where PCA churches are most numerous, have often been raised in an environment of "do and do and do" (to quote John Wesley Weasel from Walter Wangerin's Dun Cow books). Their spirituality was measured by how active they were in their local church and youth group. The better, more "spiritual" students were the ones who went to Sunday School, Sunday worship, Sunday evening youth group, choir practice, mid-week youth group, prayer group, Friday night outreach, Saturday prayer meeting, etc., etc., etc. This kind of Christian lifestyle leads to the wrong idea: that those who are right with God are the ones most active in spiritual activities and tasks.

Scripture, on the other hand, tells us that salvation is by grace through faith, the free gift of God, not of works, so that no one can boast.

Nothing we can do, nothing we fail to do, can add or takeaway one whit from our right standing with God. What matters is faith, faith in the work of God's Son Jesus Christ on our behalf. That work, His work, is offered to us as a free gift - we simply receive it by faith. O sweet exchange...!

However, this does not mean that works are irrelevant to the Christian life. They are necessary. To forget them is to fall back into one of the consequences of forgetting what justification is all about. We may understand what justification is, intellecually, and so forgetting pride and rejecting despair we conclude that works don't matter at all. The false conclusion is that works are completely unnecessary. And so the believer wrongly falls into anti-nomianism, the idea that he or she can do anything he or she wants, because their sin has been imputed to Christ and His righteousness imputed to their account.

However, those who know they are right with God based on His grace received through faith are rightly equipped to understand the commands of God in Scripture. They are necessary. They are required. They are imperative. They are what God has called us to do, what He prepared beforehand for us to do, now that we have received the free gift of grace by faith. And they are eager to do them, not to earn God's favor, but to express their love and gratitude to Him for what He had done for them.

These are simple truths, but the kind that need to be taught and re-taught, emphasized and re-emphasized. They are too easy to forget, too easy to drift away from, as we try to justify ourselves before God by our good works, our "superior" spirituality. Campus groups or new churches do well to emphasize these truths, and I'm convinced that if they do they set themselves apart from the mainstream of contemporary Christianity.

The kind of spirituality that God desires flows from justification and leads to sanctification, the third principle to be understood and committed to.

Labels: Calvinism, Church Planting, RUF

Posted by Martin at 10:43 PM | Permalink | Comments

Continuing discusion of the second principle: justification.

Previous posts:

Three Principles
God at Work
Scripture is Enough
A Happy Change and Sweet Exchange

At our presbytery meetings candidates for licensure or ordination are asked a series of questions, many to test their knowledge of basic doctrine. The easiest way to give the right answer is to memorize the questions and answers in the Westminster Shorter Catechism. Unfortunately, this can also come off as rote memorization, and you wonder what the poor guy really knows and really understands about the doctrine.

Lately presbytery members have taken to asking - after hearing the rote answer to "What is justification?" - the candidate what the doctrine means to them practically, how does it impact his day to day life?

I believe the doctrine of justification has two very important practical implications, summarized in the sub-principle quoted below: "A Christian's understanding that justification is the foundation for all subsequent Christian life and experience." Why is this so?

Understanding what justification is all about protects against two extremes.

The one extreme is pride. Philip Ryken says in his recent commentary on Galatians that the letter was written to recovering Pharisees. And we're all recovering Pharisees. Pharisees think their good works mean something to God, that those works make them better in the sight of God. But justification reminds us that we're all lousy sinners before God and can't do anything to save ourselves. In Christ, God provided all the righteousness we need, crediting Christ's perfect life to our account by grace through faith. Therefore we have nothing to boast of but Christ. There's no room for pride.

The other extreme is despair. The despairing person has the same problem as the prideful person; he thinks what he does - or doesn't do - matters in his salvation. But he despairs because he knows that he isn't good enough; there's no way a holy, righteous God would accept someone like him. But again, in Christ, God took away all the sin we have, crediting it to Christ's account by grace through faith. Therefore we have no reason to despair. It's not about us; it is about what God has done for us in Jesus Christ.

So practically speaking, justification reminds me not to be prideful and not to despair, but to rest on the mercy and love of God in Christ. Practically speaking then, I can focus on those things God has called me to do (like being a husband, father, employee, student, elder, son, etc.) with gratitude and thankfulness. I can do them to the best of my ability without keeping score of how well or poorly I'm doing, and trust that God will work through me because I'm doing what He's called me to do.

Labels: Calvinism, Church Planting, RUF

Posted by Martin at 7:18 AM | Permalink | Comments

The second principle from the Reformed University Ministries campus ministry conference was that "justification is God reconciling sinners to Himself in Christ."

I thought I might be able to cover this in one post. Silly me. I'll simply try to introduce the topic now.

Here's how they outlined this second principle to be understood and committed to:

1. Justification is God's declaring the believer forgiven of all his sins on the basis of Christ's bearing the guilt and penalty of his sins on the cross.
2. Justification is God's declaring the believer righteous on the basis of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to him.
3. Justification springs from God's free grace and is received by faith alone.
4. A proper understanding of justification leads to:
• A Christian's continual acknowledgment that his acceptance by God is based totally on the work of Christ.
• A Christian's understanding that justification is the foundation for all subsequent Christian life and experience.
• A Christian's knowledge that sanctification necessarily flows from justification.

That's a little more detailed than "just as if I never sinned."

There are two quotes that I love in connection with this doctrine:

So, making a happy change with us, He took upon Himself our sinful person, and gave unto us His innocent and victorious Person; wherewith we being now clothed are freed from the curse of the law.

From Martin Luther's commentary on Galatians

and

But when our iniquity was fulfilled and it had become fully manifest, that its reward of punishment and death waited for it, and the time came which God had appointed to manifest henceforth his kindliness and power (O the excellence of the kindness and love of God!) he did not hate us nor reject us nor remember us for evil, but was long-suffering, endured us, himself in pity took our sin, himself gave his own Son as ransom for us, the Holy for the wicked, the innocent for the guilty, the just for the unjust, the incorruptible for the corruptible, the immortal for the mortal. For what else could cover our sins but his righteousness? In whom was it possible for us, in our wickedness and impiety, to be made just, except in the son of God alone? O the sweet exchange, O the inscrutable creation, O the unexpected benefits, that the wickedness of many should be concealed in the one righteous, and the righteousness of the one should make righteous many wicked!

From the Epistle to Diognetus, 2nd/3rd century

Justification is at the heart of Reformed theology - not election, not predestination, not the five points of Calvinism (TULIP). It was emphasized as the heart of campus ministry, and so also it is the heart of church planting. The good news of the Gospel is this happy change, this sweet exchange, and so it should be front and center.

Labels: Calvinism, Church History, Church Planting, RUF

Posted by Martin at 7:10 AM | Permalink | Comments

I picked up the current issue of Christianity Today the other day, having heard (first I think through Ref21) about their cover article on the resurgence of Calvinism.

It was a nice, encouraging article.

I grew up mostly in the old UPC, in a conservative congregation. I knew about and believed in such doctrines as predestination and election, and remember hearing about TULIP. But we weren't taught, nor was there an emphasis on, "Reformed theology." It wasn't until I heard a sermon in my late 20's by Mike Horton that I really "got" Reformed theology - and boy did I get it. All the things I'd been taught and believed suddenly fit together and made sense.

The CT article seemed to focus more on the resurgence of Calvinism in Baptist circles. I suppose that makes sense, since there are so many of them. But I believe the rise of Calvinism really owes a great debt to men like R.C. Sproul, James Boice and others of that generation who began writing books and holding conferences on Reformed theology, and through whose teaching the Holy Spirit has brought about a re-awakening in Presbyterian and Reformed circles. As influential as men like John Piper and Mike Horton are, I'm not sure they'd even be around if the groundwork hadn't been laid before them.

I've seen this rise in my own lifetime, and it is absolutely wonderful to see.

Not long after the death of James Boice, my mother and I were wondering who the next generation of leaders and teachers would be in Reformed circles. Praise God that He has raised up another generation of men. I am so thankful.

I'm thankful also that this new generation has a spirit of humility and cooperation, evidenced by the Together for the Gospel conference and organizations like the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. The sentiment expressed by Joshua Harris at the end of the article is one I share deeply. If we really believe in the sovereignty of God, and of our own inability, how can we possibly be arrogant? And yet that seems to have been a besetting sin in Calvinist circles. Again, I am thankful that it doesn't seem to be among the younger generation, and I pray it continues.

Labels: Calvinism

Posted by Martin at 6:57 AM | Permalink | Comments