Comments Open and Closed

I’ve not read all of Horton’s works, and while I admire the man greatly, I think he’s all over the map on the issue of politics and activism, rightly or wrongly.

As a confessional guy in the PCA, I don’t mind the meeting. It reminds me that the PCA was always intended to be a fairly broad, big denomination.

No reason to tear your robe because there are guys in it who are wrong (but still within orthodox doctrine).

Was the southern church any better in Dabney’s day?

Avoid the temptation to romanticize the past!

Chris D.,

Talk about alarming, Chatham House rules are hardly appropriate at meetings like Bilderberg, why would they be appropriate in the PCA? I understand the motives are probably not sinister here, and the desire to speak freely without fear of redress is important, however these men have been appointed to their roles by the consent of their congregations and presbyteries and as such anything that they discuss with regards to the PCA at large, or their congregations must be done so under the authority of these structures.

The biggest problems facing the PCA are issues that have come to fruition since it’s inception – as a big tent denomination it is going to be increasingly hard to bring the disparate factions together as they galvanize over time. At some point the conversation might need to turn to how we can part ways amicably and still exist with close eclesiastical ties, most likely through NAPARC. This seems like a far more workable solution than the repeated attempts to bang round pegs into square holes.

Trevin Wax on the Gospel Coalition blog today writes about “minimalism” and explains that the coalition is “confessional”. Here’s some of what he wrote:

“I understand there are multiple issues related to the resignation of James MacDonald from The Gospel Coalition. But at the foundational level, it’s safe to assume that the philosophy of The Elephant Room proposes a different way forward for evangelicalism than The Gospel Coalition does. And the primary differences zero in on the question of minimalism. In other words, what is the minimal number of doctrines and beliefs that must be agreed upon in order for there to be close friendship and fellowship between pastors?

“Contemporary evangelicalism is a big tent that keeps getting bigger. A short list of doctrines must be in place in order for people to cooperate, fellowship, or share a platform together, but there is no consensus regarding how those doctrines should affect one’s ministry philosophy. Confessional evangelicalism seeks to renew the center of the movement by uniting likeminded believers around the gospel and promoting the centrality of the gospel in one’s teaching and preaching. A common theological vision for ministry leads these pastors to take associations very seriously, and even if there are no hard, fast rules in place, they generally refrain from sharing a platform together in a way that leads to a perceived endorsement.

“The Elephant Room aligns more with the ethos of contemporary evangelicalism (public platform-sharing with anyone who confesses Christ). The Gospel Coalition aligns more with the ethos of confessional evangelicalism (public platform-sharing with those who share a common theological vision of ministry).

“It is good to celebrate an affirmation of orthodoxy, but even better to affirm the celebration of orthodoxy…. T. D. Jakes was asked to clarify his position on the Trinity. Thankfully, he did so – though perhaps not in a way that would satisfy all of his critics. I believe we should celebrate his affirmation of the truth that there is one God in three Persons.

At the same time we celebrate Jakes’ affirmation of truth, we should also look at what it is that he celebrates in his preaching and teaching. Surely one must ask why we have to discover Jakes’ view of the Trinity in a friendly panel discussion in Chicago instead of in the sermons he delivers to his church in Texas. In other words, the issue is not if Jakes believes in the Trinity, but to what extent Jakes’ belief in the Trinity matters to his ministry? Does the weight of this truth come out in his preaching and teaching?” from Trevin Wax’s blog on the GC

mark mcculley: You can read the rest, but I am reminded again of the relativism of the “modernist/conservative” conflict. There will always be somebody more modernist than you, and thus the goal line keeps changing, and what counts as “Reformed” and “confessional” is not what it used to be.

I suppose we could discover Tim Keller’s view of effectual atonement for the elect by looking back at a panel discussion he had about the Westminster Confession once upon a time when he was ordained, but perhaps the issue is to what extent that shelf doctrine influences his preaching, his apologetics, and his associations.

The liberals in the PCA (Keller et al) should just re-join the PCUSA and the confessionalists should join the OPC, much like the latter should have done in 1936 rather than waiting another 40 years to start a new denomination.

I admire much of what Dr Horton writes and I hope he is not straying from his earlier comments, simply because I think they are important — and Biblical. We do not need “Christian movies, Christian literature” et cetera, —- and they cannot be as such — in order to justify lawful, secular vocations. Distinctions should be made between Holy Things, common things, because it would seem to me the Holy Scriptures (in the course of the NT Church) makes such distinctions.