Maybe I can beat Aquila Report with the scoop on this one (thanks to our chortling correspondent). In response to Lane Keister’s post about how the Federal Visionaries won a rightful place within the PCA, Lee — a Pirates fan who pastors in Nebraska, so he must be reliable (whatever) — posits this (which is “what I’m sayin’” but better said):
Lane thinks the FV guys won and took over, and I think that a 3rd party took the opportunity run off the TR’s (for lack of a better term) and gain complete control. I think the “evangelical middle” as Lane refers to them has always had designs on running this denomination.
Let me take you back to the Presbyterian Pastors Leadership Network and 2002. They pushed Good Faith Subscription and a change in the way of GA taking original jurisdiction. Now the change to BCO 34-1 and original jurisdiction failed, but the PPLN won. 40 Presbyteries agreed, it just was short of the 2/3rds required. Thus the majority of the PCA thought Presbytery discipline was enough. Couple that with the Good Faith Subscription, which in my opinion gave more wiggle room to those who disagree with the confession, and the groundwork is set.
That lead nicely into Presbyterians and Presbyterians Together in 2006 (which is no longer on the internet but my summary is still up). This was a clear call from many men that prosecution of others would not be tolerated. This was not so much the FV men courting the evangelical middle, this was the establishment of the PCA saying they wanted the FV men and could do without the TR guys. Lots of Covenant Theological Seminary men signed this document. This is of course the same year that The Missouri Presbytery Report of FV came out, which was an attempt to split the middle, and would later serve as the basis for clearing Rev. Jeff Meyers, who was on the committee. So, too, by the way, were Bryan Chapell, C. John Collins, and David Chapman of Covenant Seminary.
Then comes the 2007 FV report at GA. Now this was heralded by the TRs as a great moment, but really it meant nothing. This is one reason it was able to get such a wide margin vote. The groundwork had been laid that Presbyteries could let in whoever with Good Faith and that the prosecutors in trials are the bad guys. And this report was in no way judicial so why fight it.
Then Lee goes through the case against Steve Wilkens and finally comes to TKNY:
Enter into the debate now the powerful Tim Keller. Published author, featured in magazines, and pastor of a huge church in New York City. Keller gives a speech in June of 2010 about what is so great about the PCA. While I disagree with a lot of Keller’s historical analysis, the main point of Keller’s paper/talk was to promote the idea that the PCA is a diverse body and should remain that way. Clearly then those who are trying to get rid of a subgroup are in the wrong. There was a lot that went into the Strategic Plan that the PCA bounced around and they did change some of it, but they still created “safe spaces” and they advanced their overall agenda of the PCA being a “big tent” denomination, a “big tent” that included the FV. Only those who do not want a “big tent” are not welcome.
The point Lee helpfully makes is that history rarely offers up watershed moments. Most historical episodes are part of developments that have long been percolating in seemingly insignificant acts or statements. It is only historians (and screenplay writers) who turn the ordinary into drama. (That’s why they pay one of us the big bucks.)
Old Life 
Sectarians like you never have the modesty to stay in the big catholic tent.
Like, for example, the humble James Jordan:
“The sectarian compares the weakness of other churches to his own supposed strength, and pronounces them apostate on that basis. The catholic notes the weakness of other churches, and because of that tries to work with them, and prays for them. The sectarian thinks history has ended; the catholic realizes that it has not. (If anything, by the way, ‘postmillennialists’ should be even more flexibly catholic than others, because they believe that history has a long way to go, and that theology and ecclesiology will be developing for centuries to come.)”
– James Jordan, The Sociology of the Church, pg. 59
http://twoedgedsword.blogspot.in/2008/08/this-quote-from-james-jordan-says-it.html
But here’s another quotation from the very same James Jordan:
“We depart from the whole Reformation tradition at certain pretty basic points. It’s no good pretending otherwise. I think the PCA is perfectly within its rights to say no to all types like us. We are NOT traditional presbyterians. The PCA suffers us within itself, but we are poison to traditional presbyterianism. We are new wine, and the PCA is an old skin. So, for the sake of the people we are called to minister to, we do our best. But we don’t really “belong” there.
“I mean, think about it. Would any of you seek ordination in a Baptist denomination? No. Then why do you seek ordination in non-paedocommuning Presbyterian/Reformed denominations? Don’t tell me that these aren’t the same question, because at the practical level, American presbyterianism is just “Baptist light.” That’s what Banner of Truth Calvinism is, and why it’s been Reformed Baptists who most appreciate it…. That’s what the So. Presbyterian tradition is. That’s what American individualist conversionist presbyterianism is: Baptists who sprinkle babies.
“So, why are you trying to get ordained presbyterian? Why not seek to get ordained Baptist? There are a whole lot more baptists out there. A bigger pond. Larger sphere of influence.
“Well, it’s because the baptists won’t have us, and so far the presbys will. But there’s no reason why the presbys should receive us, since sacramentally speaking we are NOT Reformed and NOT presbyterian.
“I’m a little bit sympathetic with Duncan & Co. when they suspect some of you guys are not being honest when you try to show that you’re just good traditional Reformed guys. I guess it’s a good thing I did not make it to the Knox Seminary discussion, because I would have openly said, “I’m not on the same page as Calvin and the Reformation in these regards.” Showing that the Reformed tradition is wider and muddier than Duncan wants it to be is fine, but the fact is that if you believe in paedocommunion, you’re not in the Reformed tradition at all in a very significant and profound sense.”
LikeLike
Here’s the url for the second (less catholic) Jordan quotation.
http://biblicalhorizonsyahoos.blogspot.com/p/federal-vision-moment-of-clarity.html
LikeLike
The issue isn’t sectarianism. Though it exists. The problem in the PCA is Tim Keller and Doug Wilson treating the PCA as Franchisees and CTS’ , PCPC’s and I’m sure now Redeemer seminary’s complicity. Tim Keller’s PCA is a “follow the money trail” kind of opportunity. CREC is a postmillenial, utopian even homeschooling opportunity. Sorry homeschoolers, it’s a wide brush I know.
LikeLike
Aquila Report ran this one last night.
LikeLike
RGM, that’s what I get for being timely.
LikeLike
Does anybody know this Lee fellow? Is he a pastor in the PCA in Nebraska? I like some of what I am reading on his blog
http://twoedgedsword.blogspot.com/2004/12/history-justification-and-current.html
Sean, I think this was Lee’s point—that it is NOT sectarianism, because the middle is using that threat (sects!) to get the TRs to “go —- themselves” (excommunicate themselves, leave, castrate themselves, don’t let the door hit your backside etc).
But of course this ironically means that those in the middle majority become a “sect” of their own.
David Engelsma: “In almost all cases of ecclesiastical apostasy the main culprits are not the heretics themselves but the reputedly moderately conservative majority that refuses to condemn the heretics and thus supports them. This was the case in the struggle of Machen against the Presbyterian Church.”
DE: “But this reality of church life points up two important truths. First, discipline is lacking, and discipline is one of the marks of a true church (Belgic Conf., Art. 29). The PCA shows the marks of a false church. Second, the reputedly moderately conservative majority is in fact hypocritical in its posturing. By refusing to condemn heresy–denial of justification by faith alone, hardly a minor matter by anyone’s standards–it becomes guilty of the heresy itself. What must be thought of the orthodox who nevertheless remain in such a church, giving it their money and their children?”
LikeLike
MM – those two quotes in your last post are worth gold and are right on the money, especially the one from Engelsma. And they’re Biblical, too! We’re told that those who tolerate known heresies will be condemned in the same manner as the perpetrators.
Here’s another one you might like from 19th Century Lutheran Charles Porterfield Krauth:
“When error is admitted into the Church, it will be found that the stages of its progress are always three. It begins by asking toleration. Its friends say to the majority: You need not be afraid of us; we are few, and weak; only let us alone; we shall not disturb the faith of the others. The Church has her standards of doctrine; of course we shall never interfere with them; we only ask for ourselves to be spared interference with our private opinions. Indulged in this for a time, error goes on to assert equal rights. Truth and error are two balancing forces. The Church shall do nothing which looks like deciding between them; that would be partiality. It is bigotry to assert any superior right for the truth. We are to agree to differ, and any favoring of the truth, because it is truth, is partisanship. What the friends of truth and error hold in common is fundamental. Anything on which they differ is ipso facto non-essential. Anybody who makes account of such a thing is a disturber of the peace of the church. Truth and error are two co-ordinate powers, and the great secret of church-statesmanship is to preserve the balance between them. From this point error soon goes on to its natural end, which is to assert supremacy. Truth started with tolerating; it comes to be merely tolerated, and then only for a time. Error claims a preference for its judgments on all disputed points. It puts men into positions, not as at first in spite of their departure from the Church’s faith, but in consequence of it. Their recommendation is that they repudiate the faith, and position is given them to teach others to repudiate it, and to make them skillful in combating it.”
LikeLike
Tim Keller as Charles Erdman or Robert Speer?
LikeLike
Sean,
Technically the PCA would be the franchisor. Hopefully they’re at least getting some decent royalties from the FV congregations.
LikeLike
Erik, I was thinking of some individual church plants with which I’ve been involved. Work harder on never correcting me, it just makes you look wrong and you run the risk of me making my way to Iowa to ‘help’ you with your nanny self.
LikeLike
Let’s not forget to thank the PeeCeeAy’s NW and MO prebyteries and FVers in general for grooming several of the Callerites. Metro NY too.
LikeLike
Sean – , it just makes you look wrong and you run the risk of me making my way to Iowa to ‘help’ you with your nanny self.
Erik – Get in line. This morning my wife hid my yellow “Jamaica” shirt to try to help me not look like an idiot at work. She was unsuccessful. Bolt & Shelly-Ann Fraser Price were due my honor, fashion sense be damned.
LikeLike
Mark, thanks for those quotes from DE. Source, please?
LikeLike
Professor Engelsma’s email to me yesterday. But the paragraphs will likely end up in the book he’s writing on justification. I will let you know.
LikeLike
But here’s another quotation about the evil of tolerating “moderates”
The Effects of a Perverted Gospel, by William Rushton (A Defense of Particular Redemption)
The Lord Jesus Christ, to whom all the saints are united, is the only foundation and bond of spiritual union. The whole family meet and center in Him. That which unites them is his glorious person and work, and that which demands their obedience is his voice. “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them and they follow me.”
This voice which they hear is the truth of the gospel which they love and which produces among them love for each other for the truth’s sake. If, therefore, the people of God are united in the bond of truth, it is evident that nothing is so effectual to scatter them as the influence of erroneous doctrine, especially such as effects the righteousness of Christ which is the ground of their unity, concord and hope. Hence the zeal of the apostle against legal doctrines and false teachers. Hence the connection between unsound doctrines and divisions in the church. “Now, I beseech you, brethren, mark them who cause divisions contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them.” [Romans xvi. 17, 18.]
LikeLike
Rushton was a baptist writing in 1831:
In the kingdom of Christ the advancement of doctrines which obscure the glory of imputed righteousness and exalt human merit, is an offense of the most malignant kind, because it tends directly to abase the Lord Jesus and to destroy unity among His people. For this reason, much is said in Scripture against the teachers of such doctrines. “Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the Lord.” (Jeremiah 23:1.)
The effect of a legal ministry is not only to produce divisions among the people of God, but also to exalt the preacher. The apostle abased himself, that the brethren might be exalted, 2 Cor. 11:7; but the false teachers exalted themselves, and brought the saints into bondage, 2 Cor. 11:20.
Self-exaltation is a mark which invariably distinguishes the preachers of a perverted gospel. While their doctrine has a direct tendency to obscure the glory of Christ it tends to magnify themselves. Their followers, instead of hearing the voice of Christ, are brought into subjection to their preacher and this preacher becomes the bond of union among them. “Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to DRAW AWAY DISCIPLES AFTER THEM.” (Acts 20:30)
This spirit which began to work in the days of the apostles, is the foundation of all that clerical dominion which constitutes the very strength of antichrist and the support of his accursed kingdom.We greatly mistake the mind of the spirit in the Scriptures if we imagine that the marks of a false church are to be found nowhere except within the pale of the Papacy.according to the fruits they bring forth.
The doctrine now prevailing among us relative to the glorious atonement and righteousness of Christ is quite a different thing from that which is handed down to us in the Scriptures, and it has also been shown that such doctrine induces worldly conformity and a dead profession. The natural tendency of such principles is to scatter the people of God and to destroy the unity of the Spirit.
Wherever the precious doctrines of grace are kept back in the public exposition of the word, there, though carnal professors may be pleased, the saints will be deprived of that rich provision which God hath laid up for them.
LikeLike
As I understand it, “Lee” is a recent graduate of New Geneva and recently ordained in the RCUS. My source is Bud Powell who the first I encountered who called attention to it -this on fb Saturday. I think the article is interesting but wrong in its understanding of what the PCA was and is. It was always a denomination controlled by the moderate middle. That middle has moved from less sophisticated evangelistic orientation to a more sophisticated missoinal orientation. But what has always defined the controlling center is mission.
LikeLike
Lee Johnson is Pastor at St John’s Reformed Church (RCUS) in Lincoln, NE. He’s been in the RCUS for at least five years…
LikeLike
Wow, marvelous weblog format! How long have you ever been blogging for? you make running a blog glance easy. The total glance of your website is excellent, as neatly as the content!
LikeLike
Attorneys, about four years, thanks.
LikeLike