link rel="shortcut icon" href="http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e339/mongrelhorde/favicon.jpg" /> <body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d18785001\x26blogName\x3dMongrel+Horde:++Just+Plain+Mutts!\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://mongrelhorde.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://mongrelhorde.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-4489462257632951631', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Anyone for a Scottish Revival?


Dr. R. Scott Clark was kind enough to stop by again and lend our blog some credibility by posting some good stuff in the comment box. He alluded to some blog posts from Rick Phillips, which you can read here and here (which includes some info on the PCA side of the controversy). Apparently, a petition is going around, hilariously named "Presbyterians and Presbyterians Together", calling for "charity" in the whole Federal Vision debate. Fair enough, and I'm the first to say that we need to do all we can to prevent a "Scottish Revival" (i.e. church division). But what does "charity" really mean here? Clark observes:

I don't mean to be cynical, but is it mere coincidence that the PPT call for "charity" came out just after the OPC report?


Indeed. The Petition seems to go beyond a mere call for charity and assumes the very thing that is under debate in the church courts right now: that the Federal Vision is consistent with the confessional standards.

In my imaginary dream world, I can hope that the General Assemblies, Synods, and courts will biblically sift the wheat from the tares in the fairly heterogeneous Federal Vision world, laying out carefully and clearly which tenants or elements are outside the confessions and which are not. The involved ministers would then clarify, retract, repent, or turn in their collars accordingly. We would then all join hands and skip into the sunset, the soundtrack orchestra would swell, and the credits would roll. But somehow Reformed controversies seldom turn out that way.

Also: read Ron Gleason's demolition of similar "can't we all just get along" mushy-mindedness from John Armstrong here. He's the first guy I go to when I need theological firepower from an ex-tank commander.

Category: Theoblogia

3 Comments:

  • Greetings gentlemen,

    Hate to intrude on this post - I have nothing blog-worthy to comment here. I do, however, plan on visiting the rest of the site.

    The reason I'm leaving this comment (I couldn't find an email address anywhere)is to ask about your blog template design. I really like it & am considering changing mine up.

    Would either of you three mind emailing me (via my blogger profile) and sharing any info you might have.

    I'd sure appreciate it!

    (BTW, I found this blog via Garet's comments at Pyro)

    By Blogger Aaron, at 4:20 PM  

  • But, indeed, some of the FVers themselves are "warrior children", too.

    Also, Mike Horton has pointed out that the covenant of works/covenant of grace distinction really is not as novel as some want to make it - it is essentially the codification of Luther's law/gospel distinction.

    By Blogger David Gadbois, at 5:21 PM  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger David Gadbois, at 5:23 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home