rs clark slanders fv teachers

7/25/2019 RS Clark Slanders FV Teachers

1/14

3/18/10 6:eidelcast 14 March 2010: Clark & Keister on the Leithart Case, James Jordan, & the Theocratic Background of the FV Movement Heidelblog

Page 1ttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-20rdan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17288

Search

ORDER SCOTTSBOOKS:

Heidelcast 14 March2010: Clark & Keister on

the Leithart Case, James Jordan, & the

Theocratic Background of the FV MovementPosted on March 14, 2010 by R. Scott Clark

Heidelcast 14 March

2010: Clark & Keister on

the Leithart Case, James

Jordan, and the

Theocratic Background to

the FV Movement

Subscribe to the

Heidelcast on iTunes.

Subscribe by RSS. Links

and all the episodes are

here.

Contact the Heidelcast at

[email protected] or

leave voice mail at 760

278 1563.

Joining me again is the Rev Mr Lane Keister, pastor of Hull Christian

Reformed Church and Hope Reformed Church in Hague, ND. Hes well

known for his work on Greenbaggins.

Today, were talking about the latest developments in the Leithart case in

the Pacific NW Presbytery PCA (see the links below). Were also going to

listen to a few audio clips of some public remarks by a leading light in the

FV movement, James Jordan.

Some Actually Related Posts

PCA SJC Overturns Pac NW Presbytery

Heidelcast 7 March 2010: Clark and Keister on the State of the FV

Controversy

A Ruling Elder Pleads on Behalf of the Sheep

Thinking about the CREC?

For Those Just Tuning In

The CRE is Not Enough?

A Denial of the Biblical Doctrine of Perseverance

Speaking a Foreign Language

FV Inroads in Europe?

A Gentle Rebuke to Brother John

The Arminius Paradigm

Reformed Christianity and Quasi- Reformed Revisionism

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

TOP POSTS

Does the FV Really Say That?

None Dare Call It Confused: USA is NotIsrael

The Latest on the ARP/Erskine Saga-Wed1PM (Eastern) Live On Air

Heidelcast 14 March 2010: Clark & Keisteron the Leithart Case, James Jordan, & theTheocratic Background of the FVMovement

Congratulations to WSC Grad Brad Lenzne

Welcome to a Reformed Church!PCA SJC Overturns PNW Presbytery: IndicLeithart

The Three Uses of the Law

The Heidelcast

NewsErskine College Officials ObtainTRO Against ARP Synod

RECENT COMMENTS

rfwhite on Heidelcast 14 March2010: Clar

Jack milleron None Dare CallIt Confused: US

Barbara Harvey on Heidelcast14 March 2010: Clar


R. Scott Clarkon None DareCall It Confused: US

R. Scott Clarkon The Latest onthe ARP/Erskine

R. Scott Clarkon Heidelcast 14March 2010: Clar

David A Booth on The Latest onthe ARP/Erskine


GARY LENZNER (GRANDPon Congratulations to WSCGrad Br

BLOGROLL

Against Heresies

Between Two Worlds

Blogorrhea
http://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=111&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbookshttp://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=111&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbookshttp://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=111&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbookshttp://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://theworldsruined.blogspot.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/pca-sjc-overturns-pnw-presbytery-leithart-contradicts-wcf/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/http://ruberad.wordpress.com/http://theologica.blogspot.com/http://against-heresies.blogspot.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/congratulations-to-wsc-grad-brad-lenzner/#comment-17276http://cox/http://cox/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17277http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/16/the-latest-on-the-arperskine-saga-wed-1pm-eastern-live-on-air/#comment-17278http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17279http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/16/the-latest-on-the-arperskine-saga-wed-1pm-eastern-live-on-air/#comment-17280http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/none-dare-call-it-confused-usa-is-not-israel/#comment-17281http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17282http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17283http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/none-dare-call-it-confused-usa-is-not-israel/#comment-17284http://theworldsruined.blogspot.com/http://theworldsruined.blogspot.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17287http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/10/news%e2%80%94erskine-college-officials-obtain-tri-against-arp-synod/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/the-heidelcast/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/the-three-uses-of-the-law/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/pca-sjc-overturns-pnw-presbytery-leithart-contradicts-wcf/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/welcome-to-a-reformed-church/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/congratulations-to-wsc-grad-brad-lenzner/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/16/the-latest-on-the-arperskine-saga-wed-1pm-eastern-live-on-air/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/none-dare-call-it-confused-usa-is-not-israel/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/does-the-fv-really-say-that/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2007/01/02/reformed-christianity-and-quasi-reformed-revisionism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/02/3318/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/gentle-rebuke-brother-john/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/the-fv-making-inroads-in-e-europe/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/wilson-federal-vision-justification/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/a-denial-of-the-biblical-doctrine-of-the-perseverance-of-the-saints/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2007/11/14/the-crec-is-not-enough/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/for-those-just-tuning-in-what-is-the-federal-vision/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/thinking-about-the-confederation-of-reformed-evangelicals/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/08/a-ruling-elder-pleads-on-behalf-of-the-flock/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/07/heidelcast-7-march-2010-clark-and-keister-discuss-the-state-of-the-fv-controversy/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/pca-sjc-overturns-pnw-presbytery-leithart-contradicts-wcf/http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/the-heidelcast/http://heidelblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/heidelcast-14-march-2010.mp3http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/http://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=2064&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbookshttp://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=2602&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbookshttp://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=917&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbookshttp://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=111&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbookshttp://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=2043&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbooks


2/14



SUBSCRIBE TOOFFICE HOURS

SUBSCRIBE TO THEHEIDELCAST

HEIDELBLOGRESOURCES

Audio, Radio, and Video

Comments Policy

Heidelberg Catechism

My WSC Site

Oceanside URC

R. Scott Clark

Recent Books and Essays

Recovering the

Heidelcast 7 March 2010: Clark and Keister Discuss the

State of the FV Cont

Filed under: Covenant, Justification, Pastoral Ministry, Two kingdoms, federal vision, heidelcast |

Tagged: Confderation of Reformed Evangelical Churches, CREC, Douglas Wilson, federal vision,

James Jordan,jason stellman, Moscow ID, New St Andrews College, pacific nw presbytery, pca, peter

leithart

Dont Miss Tomorrows HeidelcastNew on the WHI: VanDrunen on the

Two Kingdoms

44 Responses

Frank Aderholdt, on March 14, 2010 at 3:40 amSaid:

Its shortly after 5:30 a.m. CDT. I just finished this weeks Heidelcast.

Superb! Give us more, please!

Reply

R. Scott Clark, on March 14, 2010 at 9:03 amSaid:

Hi Frank,

Thanks!

http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/the-heidelcast/

http://www.wscal.edu/resources/audio/officehours/index.php

Reply

kenbrec, on March 14, 2010 at 7:31 amSaid:

Listeningdo you see a link to the FV justification by obedient faith and

the doctrine of justification by Karl Rahner?

Reply

kenbrec, on March 14, 2010 at 8:43 amSaid:

I mean do you see a link between the two.

Thanks,

Ken

Reply


Hi Ken,

Its been a long time since I read Rahner, so no, Im not consciously

making a connection. Is there one? Id have to research to find out. Do

you think there is one?

Reply

GLW Johnson, on March 14, 2010 at 11:58 amSaid:

Wow-Jordon sounds like one of the looney Zwickau prophets.

Reply

Chunck, on March 14, 2010 at 6:36 pmSaid:

Building Old School Churches

Calvin500

Christless Christianity

Creed Code Cult

Creed or Chaos

Creideamh (Iain Campbell)

Daily Confession

Daily Westminster

Detergere

Feeding on Christ

Geneva Redux

Gospel-Centered Musings

Green Baggins

Heinrich Bullinger

Helms Deep

Heritage Book Talk

Herman Bavinck

In Principio Deus

James Durham Thesis

Ken Myers' Mars Hill Audio

Letters From Mississippi

Ligonier MInistries

Meredith G. Kline Resources

Nathan W. Bingham

Nick Batzig

Nicotine Theological Journal

North American Presbyterian andReformed Council

Office Hours from Westminster SeminaryCalifornia

Old Life Theological Society

Oxford English Dictionary

Pilgrim People

Pilgrims and Parish

Pillar and Ground

Reason From Scripture

Ref21

Reformation Theology

Reformation2Germany

Reformed Musings

Sean Michael Lucas

The Confessional Outhouse

The Confessionalist

The Continuing Story

The Conventicle

The Daily Scroll

The Gordian Knot

The Melangerie

The Reformed Reader

The Riddleblog

The Upper Register

The White Horse Inn Blog

Underdog Theology

URCNA Discussion List

Water is Thicker Than Blood

Wes Bredenhof

Wes White
http://johannesweslianus.blogspot.com/http://www.bredenhof.ca/http://wateristhickerthanblood.wordpress.com/http://groups.google.com/group/URCNAhttp://underdogtheology.blogspot.com/http://www.whitehorseinn.org/index.phphttp://upper-register.typepad.com/http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/the-latest-post/http://reformedreader.wordpress.com/http://melangerie.blogspot.com/http://www.christopherjgordon.blogspot.com/http://www.dailyscroll.net/http://theconventicle.com/http://continuing.wordpress.com/http://confessionalreformedbaptist.blogspot.com/http://confessionalouthouse.wordpress.com/http://seanmichaellucas.blogspot.com/http://reformedmusings.wordpress.com/http://www.reformation2germany.org/http://www.reformationtheology.com/http://www.reformation21.org/blog/http://reasonfromscripture.wordpress.com/http://graceleduc.wordpress.com/http://www.oceansideurc.org/journal/http://michaelbrown.squarespace.com/http://www.oed.com/http://oldlife.org/http://www.wscal.edu/resources/audio/officehours/about.phphttp://www.naparc.org/http://oldlife.org/http://feedingonchrist.blogspot.com/http://nwbingham.com/http://meredithkline.com/http://www.ligonier.org/blog/?page_url=blog.phphttp://davestrain.wordpress.com/http://www.marshillaudio.org/http://jamesdurham.wordpress.com/http://diatheke.wordpress.com/http://inprincipiodeus.solideogloria.com/http://hermanbavinck.org/http://heritagebooktalk.org/http://paulhelmsdeep.blogspot.com/http://heinrichbullingerpage.wordpress.com/http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/http://gospelcenteredmusings.com/http://genevaredux.wordpress.com/http://feedingonchrist.com/http://detergere.blogspot.com/http://dailywestminster.wordpress.com/http://dailyconfession.wordpress.com/http://creideamh.blogspot.com/http://creedorchaos.wordpress.com/http://www.creedcodecult.com/http://christlesschristianity.org/http://calvin500blog.org/http://biblebased.wordpress.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17154http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17151#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17151http://www.churchredeemeraz.org/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17149#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17149http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17147#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17147http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17146#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17146http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17148#respondhttp://www.wscal.edu/resources/audio/officehours/index.phphttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/the-heidelcast/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17148http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17145#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17145http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/15/new-on-the-whi-vandrunen-on-the-two-kingdoms/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/13/dont-miss-tomorrows-heidelcast/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/peter-leithart/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/pca/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/pacific-nw-presbytery/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/new-st-andrews-college/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/moscow-id/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/jason-stellman/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/james-jordan/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/federal-vision/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/douglas-wilson/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/crec/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/confderation-of-reformed-evangelical-churches/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/heidelcast/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/federal-vision/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/two-kingdoms/http://en.wordpress.com/tag/covenant-justification-pastoral-ministry/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/07/heidelcast-7-march-2010-clark-and-keister-discuss-the-state-of-the-fv-controversy/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/recovering-the-reformed-confession/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/books-and-essays/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/about-the-author/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/about-oceanside-urc/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/my-wsc-site/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/heidelberg-catechism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/comments-policy/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/audio-and-video/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/the-heidelcasthttp://www.wscal.edu/officehourshttp://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=1341&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbookshttp://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=497&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbookshttp://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=2064&utm_source=rsclark&utm_medium=rsclark&utm_campaign=wscbooks


3/14



Reformed Confessions

Subscribing to the HB

The Heidelcast

URCNA Missions

Welcome to the Heidelblog

WestminsterSeminary California

R. SCOTT CLARK

Professor of Church Historyand Historical Theology at

Westminster SeminaryCalifornia, author, and

Associate Pastor atOceanside United ReformedChurch (Carlsbad, CA).Disclaimer: The statements,

views, and opinionspresented on the Heidelblog

are those of the author andare not endorsed by and donot necessarily reflect theopinions of WestminsterSeminary California.

HB AUDIO ON ITUNES

SUBSCRIBE TO THEHB BY EMAIL

Enter your email address tosubscribe to this blog andreceive notifications of newposts by email.

Sign me up!

RSC:

I dont understand why you and others give Dr. Leithart credit for acting

honorably merely because he performed the very simple duty of obeying

his denominations order to notify his presbytery of his differences with

Westminster, which one would think he should have done without a written

reminder from the General Assembly. Its like saying he acted honorably

when he obeyed the speed limit on a certain day even though such a

mundane action is neither honorable nor commendable. Its amoral at best.

This is a completely different subject than if he had not obeyed his

denominations order to notify his presbytery, which of course is the kind of

insolent behavior weve come to expect from FVists. I think they have

lowered our expectations of them so low that when they actually do the

right thing, some people feel compelled to pay them tribute as though

theyve done something above and beyond the call of duty.

Reply

R. Scott Clark, on March 14, 2010 at 7:56 pmSaid:

Chunck,

Well, there are ministers in the PCA whove not stepped up, whove not

presented themselves to their presbyteries (and whove yet to be

challenged by their presbyteries) who are notorious for their public

advocacy of the FV contrary to the ruling of GA 07. In contrast PL did

step up. It was also a challenge, and I said that in the show and Ive

said it before. He challenged his presbytery and most of the presbytery

failed the challenge. At least he had the will/nerve/fortitude/honor to

initiate the process.

Reply

Steve Bremer, on March 14, 2010 at 7:17 pmSaid:

Dr. Clark:

It was tough to tell from the short clip, but you and Rev. Keisterextrapolated a lot more out of Jordans butterfly comments than seems

reasonable. Do you seriously think that clip is evidence Jordan wants to

bring back a Constantinian theocracy? Huh?

It sounded more like he was saying not to bring back a Constantinian

theocracy, but instead build the church until you end up with a very non-

Constantinian theocracy.

Granting that FVs view of baptism is wrong, Jordans comment (as much

as was played in your clip) seemed to me a very reasonable one, for a post-

mil proponent.

Chunck:

Obeying the law is amoral? Its confused statements like that that have FVapologists in hot water with RSC.

Reply


Steve,

Listen to the whole talk/interview yourself. Ive been reading

Theonomic/Reconstruction/Theocratic lit for 30 years. I dont think Im

Westminster Seminary California MorningDevotions

Westminster Seminary California News

Westminster Seminary CaliforniaSubscriptions

Zwinglius Redivivus

HEIDELPOSTSMarch 2010

S M T W T F S

Feb

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27

28 29 30 31

HEIDELBLOG ARCHIVES

Select Month

HEIDELTWEETS

None Dare Call It Confused: USA is NotIsrael: http://wp.me/p9sU5-1Qd6 hours ago

Congratulations to WSC Grad Brad Lenzne: http://wp.me/p9sU5-1Qb 22 hours ago

@alejandroretesHola! I'm not sure what"vecas" are but if you speak English writeor call the seminary 23 hours ago

Well, uh, su pposed to be doing aninterview. 1 day ago

Doing an interview on KSIV St Louis at9AM 1 day ago

CATEGORY CLOUD

Aca em c Stu AmericanChristianity Calvin500 Calvin StudiesChrist and culture Classic ReformedTheology contemporary evangelicalism

Covenant,Justification, PastoralMinistry federal vision Friendsof the Heidelblog Heidelberg Catechism

Heidelflogging HistoricalTheology History of ReformedTheology History of the ReformedChurches I Get Questions John CalvinPreaching the Word

Recovering theReformedConfessionReformation ResourcesReformed Ethics Reformed PietyReforming Evangelicalismreforming worship The Mission:Reaching and Teaching Twokingdoms UncategorizedURCNA News

WestminsterSeminaryCalifornia WSC AlumniNews

TAGS

atonementbaptismca v nChristand cultureChristless ChristianityChristologychurch plantingClassicReformed Theologycommunion

Confessionalismcovenantcovenant theologyeschatologyevangelicalismevangelismfederal visiongospelHeidelberg Catechismhermeneutics

John Calvinjustificationlaw and os elmachenmeans of race
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/means-of-grace/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/machen/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/law-and-gospel/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/justification/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/john-calvin/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/hermeneutics/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/heidelberg-catechism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/gospel/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/federal-vision/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/evangelism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/evangelicalism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/eschatology/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/covenant-theology/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/covenant/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/confessionalism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/communion/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/classic-reformed-theology/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/church-planting/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/christology/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/christless-christianity/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/christ-and-culture/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/calvin/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/baptism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/atonement/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/wsc-alumni-news/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/westminster-seminary-california/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/urcna-news/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/two-kingdoms/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/the-mission-reaching-and-teaching/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/reforming-worship/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/reforming-evangelicalism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/reformed-piety/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/reformed-ethics/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/reformation-resources/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/recovering-the-reformed-confession/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/preaching-the-word/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/john-calvin/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/i-get-questions/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/history-of-the-reformed-churches/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/history-of-reformed-theology/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/academic-stuff/historical-theology-academic-stuff/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/heidelflogging/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/heidelberg-catechism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/friends-of-the-heidelblog/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/federal-vision/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/covenant-justification-pastoral-ministry/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/contemporary-evangelicalism/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/classic-reformed-theology/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/christ-and-culture/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/calvin-studies/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/calvin500/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/american-christianity/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/category/academic-stuff/http://twitter.com/RScottClark/statuses/10627555179http://twitter.com/RScottClark/statuses/10627931587http://twitter.com/RScottClark/statuses/10643484309http://twitter.com/alejandroreteshttp://twitter.com/RScottClark/statuses/10644415785http://wp.me/p9sU5-1Qbhttp://twitter.com/RScottClark/statuses/10677181789http://wp.me/p9sU5-1Qdhttp://twitter.com/RScottClarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/16/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/15/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/13/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/11/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/10/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/08/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/07/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/06/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/05/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/03/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/02/http://zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com/http://www.wscal.edu/rss/index.phphttp://feeds.feedburner.com/WestminsterSeminaryCalifornia-NewsAndEventshttp://www.wscal.edu/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17159http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17155#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17155http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17158#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17158http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17154#respondhttp://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=333401623http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/about-westminster-seminary-california/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/about/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/urcna-missions/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/the-heidelcast/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/subscribing-to-the-hb/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/reformed-confessions/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/recovering-the-reformed-confession/


4/14



misrepresenting Jordan at all.

Reply


Where can I find the whole interview?

Reply

Chunck, on March 15, 2010 at 5:50 amSaid:

Steve:

If you believe that whenever you obey the speed limit, your actions are

morally pure and honorable, then I think the confusion lies with you.

Reply


Chunck:

I dont grasp your point, but Im willing to accept that I may be

confused. Ive been confused about so much before.

Reply

todd, on March 14, 2010 at 7:44 pmSaid:

Jordan is the new Walter Camping

Reply


Harold?

Reply

todd, on March 14, 2010 at 8:19 pmSaid:

Oh yes, Harold Whos Walter Camping? Ive heard the name somewhere

Reply

Jim Bordwine, on March 15, 2010 at 1:25 amSaid:

I just listened to your podcast regarding Pacific Northwest Presbytery and

Peter Leithart. I wanted to offer a couple of additional details. In the

broadcast, I think I heard you say that the SJC did not express an opinion

regarding the character of Leitharts views. In fact, there are at least two

such statements in the SJC ruling. For example, under the heading of

Reasoning and Opinion, the members did say: The Record in this matter

suggests that there are aspects of the teachings of TE Leithart that are in

conflict with our standards. These teachings could reasonably be deemed tobe injurious to the peace and purity of the church (BCO 13-9(f)). You

correctly pointed out that the SJC could not, however, order a verdict. That

would require a trial.

The other matter involves the possibility of a trial for TE Leithart. When

the Presbytery voted on the original report from its study committee, the

majority report, which found Leitharts views not to be out of accord with

the Standards of the PCA, it was nearly a unanimous vote. This means that

the majority of men have already given their opinion on the merits of the

Mike Hortonministrymissionn. t. wright natural lawNewPerspective(s) on Paulpastoralministrypietypreaching

Recovering theReformedConfessionreformationreformedorthodoxyreformed theologysacramentssanctificationsola fide

Two kingdomsW. RobertGodfreyWestminsterSeminaryCaliforniaWhite HorseInnworship

FACEBOOK BLOG NETWORK

Blog Network:

Name:HeidelblogTopics:Christian, Theology,ConfessionalReformedJoin my network

Blog Networks

META

Log in

Entries RSS

Comments RSS

WordPress.com
http://wordpress.com/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/comments/feed/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/feed/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/wp-login.phphttp://apps.facebook.com/blognetworks/http://apps.facebook.com/blognetworks/blogpage.php?aid=633530213&blogid=5433http://apps.facebook.com/blognetworks/searchpage.php?tag=Confessional+Reformedhttp://apps.facebook.com/blognetworks/searchpage.php?tag=Theologyhttp://apps.facebook.com/blognetworks/searchpage.php?tag=Christianhttp://apps.facebook.com/blognetworks/blogpage.php?blogid=5433http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/worship/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/white-horse-inn/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/westminster-seminary-california/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/w-robert-godfrey/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/two-kingdoms/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/sola-fide/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/sanctification/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/sacraments/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/reformed-theology/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/reformed-orthodoxy/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/reformation/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/recovering-the-reformed-confession/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/preaching/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/piety/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/pastoral-ministry/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/new-perspectives-on-paul/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/natural-law/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/n-t-wright/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/mission/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/ministry/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/mike-horton/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/means-of-grace/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/machen/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/tag/law-and-gospel/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17162http://bordwine.org/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17160#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17160http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17157#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17157http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17156#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17156http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17197#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17197http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17163#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17163http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17194#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17194http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17159#respond


5/14



case that would be the focus of a trial. In our Book of Church Order,

however, 32-17, any man who expresses his opinion regarding a pending

case before the trial commences is prohibited from participating in the

procedure. In this situation, if this section of our Constitution were to be

enforced, Presbytery could not conduct a trial because all who were present

at that first vote have already indicated their judgment on the question of

TE Leitharts views as compared to our Standards. Therefore, it may be

impossible for the Presbytery to hold a trial even if we get that far.

.

Reply


Hi Jim,

Many thanks for this.

Was the SJC unaware of this problem when they sent the case back to

presbytery for resolution or are you suggesting that this case might have

to be adjudicated at the SJC/GA level?

What next?

Reply

David A Booth, on March 15, 2010 at 8:11 amSaid:

Jim,

Following your reasoning, the current SJC would also be incapable of

holding a trial because they too have already expressed an opinion

about any potential case against Dr. Leithart.

Is there a procedure in the PCA for the SJC/GA to constitute another

group of Ministers and Ruling Elders to hold a trial?

Thanks.

David

Reply

Jim Bordwine, on March 15, 2010 at 11:32 pmSaid:

Yes, thats true. The full SJC could appoint another panel to

conduct the trial, if necessary. And they could decide to try the

matter before the entire SJC (24 members in all, I believe). I

suppose the GA could also choose to erect a special commission

to hold the trial, but that is unlikely since the SJC was created to

relieve GA of such tasks.

Reply

Jim Bordwine, on March 15, 2010 at 11:25 pm Said:

In the hearing before the SJC sub-panel, back in November, I briefly

raised this issue, but they were extremely careful not to speculate on

anything beyond the focus of that meeting. The record of the case

was well-known by the members of the SJC, so I assume this

possibility occurred to them. Presbytery might be able to request

that GA assume jurisdiction of the case, which would result in the

trial being conducted by the SJC. I say might because I havent
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17198http://bordwine.org/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17199#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17199http://bordwine.org/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17166#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17166http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17165#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17165http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17162#respond


6/14



been able to find such a provision in our BCO. A local Session has

this option when, for some reason, the elders cannot handle a

discipline case. They are allowed to ask Presbytery to take over. If

the Presbytery were to conduct the trial, I believe Leithart would be

acquitted, unless a lot of the men change their minds. The adoption

of the majority report, which gave rise to our Complaint, was almost

unanimous. I cannot see a majority of those men reversing their

opinions.

Reply

Heidelcast: State of the FV Controversy, Leithart Case, James Jordan, and

Theocracy, on March 15, 2010 at 8:16 amSaid:

[...] HB, James Bordwine, one of the complainants has an interesting

explanation of what's happening. Heidelcast 14 March 2010: Clark &

Keister on the Leithart Case, James Jordan, & the Theocrat R. Scott

Clark, D.Phil Westminster Seminary California Associate Pastor, Oceanside

URC The [...]

Reply

James Caldwell, on March 15, 2010 at 3:28 pmSaid:

Dr Clark,

Approaching this from a fair play point of view about Dr Leithart.

At the 3:50 point into point in the interview you stressed that Dr Leithart

was a PCA minister who was serving in the CREC, a minister serving out of

bounds in the CREC, while at the same time you are interviewing a godly

pastor, who is also a PCA minister, who is also serving out of bounds in two

non-NAPARC congregations. BTW, I have no problem with this. But, it just

seemed to be part of building your case against Dr Leithart.

More importantly, at the same point you said in this interview you that Dr

Leithart acted honorably, but, then you changed tack and said [b]that he

basically challenged the presbytery to do something about his views[/b]

Now, I may be misunderstanding you here, maybe you didnt mean to

come across as you did, but Pastor Stellman (someone intimately close to

Dr Leithart and this situation) wrote this last night:

[quote]Concerning the FV guys all being liars, Ill just point out once again

that on the very day the GA received the Report, Leithart publically

contacted the clerk of presbytery, Rob Rayburn, and divulged in detail his

own views on the issues addressed in the Reports nine declarations, saying

that he would cheerfully submit to an inquiry into his fitness to remain a

minister in the PCA. Throughout this entire process he has been nothing

but submissive and willing to comply (even agreeing to add his name to the

original petition for a study committee). Whatever might be true of other

Federal Visionists, Leithart has demonstrated complete submission to

Presbyterian polity and process.[/quote]

Regardless of whether or not Dr Leitharts beliefs are within the PCAs

polity or not why would you say this about Dr Leithart when those closest

to the case say the opposite. Isnt this impugning his character? Or, am I

just misunderstanding you?

Reply
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17181#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17181http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17167#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17167http://www.puritanboard.com/f77/heidelcast-state-fv-controversy-leithart-case-james-jordan-theocracy-59216/#post765702http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17198#respond


7/14




James,

Frankly, youre straining at gnats here. Theres nothing wrong with

serving out of bounds and I intended no slight by it. I tried my best to

be fair and so far Ive been criticized for being too generous to Dr

Leithart. I was just trying to explain the setting of the various actions.

Lane isnt being charged with anything so his service out of bounds is

irrelevant. Lane isnt hiding his status as we made clear in the

broadcast.

I do think that Leithart was challenging presbytery (why is that

negative?) and I think presbytery failed, or at least the majority failed

so says the SJC to take up the challenge presented by Dr Leithart.

Reply

Proksch Gabriel, on March 15, 2010 at 4:01 pmSaid:

James

You said:

At the 3:50 point into point in the interview you stressed that Dr Leithart

was a PCA minister who was serving in the CREC, a minister serving out of

bounds in the CREC, while at the same time you are interviewing a godly

pastor, who is also a PCA minister, who is also serving out of bounds in two

non-NAPARC congregations. BTW, I have no problem with this. But, it just

seemed to be part of building your case against Dr Leithart.

I dont think that serving outside the bounds of PCA is a negative point,

rather its the identity of the church somebody is serving outside those

bounds. Mother church (PCA) has defined its identity in contrast with the

CRECs identity. This creates a conflict of identities, and raises the question

of loyalty: WCF, or the CRECs FV pedegree?

You said also:

More importantly, at the same point you said in this interview you that Dr

Leithart acted honorably, but, then you changed tack and said [b]that he

basically challenged the presbytery to do something about his views[/b]

When a minister writes a letter in which he expresses his disagreement

with the doctrinal views expressed by his own church, thats both an

honorable act AND also a challenge for his own church to act by enforcing

true church discipline. Am I mistaken or these two things are not as quite

as opposite as you implied?

Gabriel

Reply


Gabriel,

I dont have a problem with serving out of bounds. It was used as part of

building a case while not identifying that the godly interviewee was also

doing the same thing.

Read Pastor Stellmans remarks and find anything challenging about them

concerning Dr Leihart. He says that Dr Leithart is nothing but cheerfully
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17184http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17183#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17183http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17182#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17182http://www.wscal.edu/clark


8/14



submissive. The comment wasnt necessary.

This is what, IMO, hurts Dr Clark

Reply


James,

Youll have to take my word for it. I meant nothing critical by pointing

out Leitharts ecclesiastical status. I was merely trying to set the stage.

Not everyone who listens to the HC is completely tuned into the details

of presbyterian polity and they may wonder why a minister who is

serving a CRE congregation is under scrutiny in the PCA. Thats all that

was about. Period.

Now, if you want me to be critical of Leitharts theology, piety, and

practice, I can do that so that youll able to see the difference.

As to the challenge, well, his approach to his presbytery came in the

wake of the Joint FV Statement, which appeared after the GA. The spirit

of the moment, among the FV folk, was not exactly quiet submission.

Quiet submission would have been to say, Okay, the entire GA has said

overwhelmingly that my views are out of accord with the Scriptures as

understood by the Reformed churches. I will submit to that. That

wasnt the spirit of the Joint FV Statement. In that light I took Leitharts

letter as something of a challenge.

That said, i do appreciate his willingness to have this adjudicated. I can

think of at least a couple of other ministers in the PCA, who are not

serving out of bounds, who should do the same thing or whose

presbytery should begin inquiries as to their views and the relation of

those views to these two SJC precedents contra the FV (Wilkins and

Leithart).

Reply


Ive known Dr. Leithart for over 20 years. While the FV controversy

has required me to part company with him, theologically speaking,

we remain friends. From that point of view, I want to comment on

Dr. Scotts wording in the podcast of March 14. One person has been

mildly critical of the reference to Dr. Leitharts out of bounds

status and the use of the word challenge when describing how Dr.

Leithart initiated an investigation by Presbytery. I find nothing

inappropriate in this language. The first is a term taken from our

BCO and accurately identifies Dr. Leitharts relationship with the

PCA. The latter term describes Dr. Leitharts conduct accurately. Hehas chosen not to transfer his credentials to the CREC, although this

was highly recommended by our Credentials Committee several

years ago when Dr. Leithart first became acquainted with the CREC.

I still remember the vote on the floor of Presbytery when the

question was put to the body. There was a one vote difference, but

the majority of Presbyters approved Dr. Leitharts request to remain

in the PCA while serving in the CREC. Since the rise of the FV issue,

Dr. Leithart has indicated his preference for a trial, rather than some

other and less formal conclusion, such as the transfer of credentials.
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17200http://bordwine.org/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17185#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17185http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17184#respond


9/14



I think he wants a trial.

Reply


Dr Clark,

I believe your word as to setting the stage.

But, very very respectfully here from me, please, what are you going to do

about is reading a mans heart, I think, sir.

Thank you

Reply


oops

what are you going to do about it?

Reply

David A Booth, on March 15, 2010 at 7:39 pmSaid:

James,

For what its worth when I listened to the interview I didnt take the

phrase serving out of bounds to be in any way a negative comment.

Also, it is quite clear that Dr. Leitharts response to the PCA General

Assemblys report on the Federal Vision did represent a challenge to the

Presbytery. This is not an intrinsicly negative description. As Dr. Clark

has pointed out, Dr. Leithart is honorably presenting where his views

may differ from the GAs report and asked the Presbytery to rule

whether or not he is in bounds. That is what Ministers are supposed to

do.

David

Reply


David,

One of the oddest aspects of this case is that Dr. Leithart agreed with

the minority report when we said some of his views were not

compatible with the Standards of the PCA. He didnt endorse the

entire report, of course, but he did say that the minority had rightly

represented his positions. In spite of this, the Presbytery voted to

find him in accord with those same Standards. In the very least, the

Presbytery could have required Dr. Leithart to register his differences

as exceptions to our Standards. Our present disagreement might still

have developed, but such action, I think, could have prevented some

of the criticism of the Presbytery that has come forth. Jim

Reply

Chunck, on March 16, 2010 at 6:53 amSaid:

Dr. Bordwine,
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17205http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17201#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17201http://bordwine.org/http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17195#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17195http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17187#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17187http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17186#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17186http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17200#respond


10/14



If youre allowed to answer, I have a few questions for you.

1. Since the Pac NW Presbytery has already acquitted Dr. Leithart

by a nearly unanimous vote, should we conclude that your

presbytery was for the most part exempted from the Babylonian

curse that God struck upon the Reformed denominations?

2. Assuming that you personally did not vote to acquit Dr.

Leithart, and assuming that you are therefore smitten with the

Babylonian curse, dont you need to repent of something in orderto remove the Babylonian curse from your life?

3. Again, assuming you are cursed with the Babylonian confusion

of tongues, isnt it unjust of you, a cursed presbyter, to sit in

judgment of Dr. Leithart, who I presume is not cursed and is

therefore blessed with enlightenment?

Reply

jeffhutchinson, on March 16, 2010 at 6:49 amSaid:

Greetings, Jim.

I remember back whenever it was that the GA formed the FV/NPP Study

Committee, this came as a MINORITY report from several of us on the

(old) Bills and Overtures Committee. Probably 40 % of us wanted a Study

Committee, maybe 5% (I remember the Commissioner from the Lousiana

Presbytery in particular) spoke against the need for a Committee on the

basis that the FV/NPP were not out of accord with the Standards, but the

other 55% (my vague memory) spoke against the need for a Committee on

the grounds that PRESBYTERIES NEEDED TO GROW UP AND DO

THEIR JOB.

So, while I was sympathetic with the 55%, I was part of the 40% minority

on the Committee because, um, how do I say this.I didnt trust some

Presbyteries to do their jobs. There, I said it (Im looking at you, Missouri,

PNW, Metro NY). Im not sure if that lack of short-term trust (I do have

trust in these Presbyteries in the long run, that over time, by Gods grace,

they will do the right thing) in my sister Presbyteries makes me a bad

Presbyterian, a good Presbyterian, or neither, but there it is.

At any rate, I am very thankful for you and Jason and whoever else in

PNW has been properly concerned about these matters.

Reply

jeffhutchinson, on March 16, 2010 at 6:52 amSaid:

Oh, I should have more thoroughly identified myself, sorry.

Jeff Hutchinson

Pastor, Trinity PCA, Asheville, NC(also, for the time being, Moderator, Western Carolina Presbytery)

Reply

Reed Here, on March 16, 2010 at 11:45 amSaid:

Dr. Bordwine: any insights into why Dr. Leithart would prefer a trial. Not

asking for any speculation or divulging of confidences. Other than those,

anything insight?
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17223http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17204#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17204http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17203#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17203http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17205#respond


11/14



Reply

Ben P, Melbourne, Australia , on March 16, 2010 at 6:26 pmSaid:

Thank you for this very helpful broadcast, Dr Clark.

The following comment from Mr Keister encapsulated something that has

been bothering me about the FV approach (after the grab from James

Jordan about sprinkling some babies as the start of the road to making the

nations into theocracies):

What youll notice, then, is that the Gospel the Word of God being the

seed of faith that the Holy Spirit implants in people, bringing them to faith

in Jesus Christ is not really part of the discussion here their

sacramental theology does not really connect the sacrament to the Word, in

the sense that the Word of the Gospel bringing faith to a person is the

thing signified, and baptism is a sign of that they think that that all

happens at the same time, whether the person is really aware of it or not.

Reply

Barbara Harvey, on March 17, 2010 at 10:49 pmSaid:

Dr. Clark, I listened to the podcast tonight. Near the end, you made a

remark to the effect that some men deemed to be FV are teaching that ifone is baptized and remains faithful, they will ultimately become elect.

Since you value clarity, I believe you meant exactly what you said. This is

grossly erroneous, and you have quite aptly proven precisely what you

mocked in the podcast.

Reply


Barbara,

The FV writers do say this. Thats why I said it. The FV has set up a system

whereby one can become decretally elect. Federal Visionists (from

Moscow, ID) have said to me (at a conference in Boise, ID among other

instances) that, had Esau persevered he would have become elect.

Reply


If you will tell me who said this to you, Ill check the accuracy of your

report. However, I highly doubt the word become was used. I suspect the

words been or would have been or proven himself were used instead

since, in such a case, Esau would not have apostatized. The example is used

because Esau did, in fact, live out his unfaithfulness. I believe the scenario

is drawn from Schilder (but I may be mistaken).

There is nothing in any FV teaching to indicate that one can become

elect.

This is what the FV Joint Statement has to say about the matter:

The Divine Decrees

We affirm that the triune God is exhaustively sovereign over all things,

working out all things according to the counsel of His will. Because this

necessarily includes our redemption in Christ, God alone receives all the

glory for our salvation. Before all worlds, God the Father chose a great host
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17277http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17266#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17266http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17258#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17258http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17235#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17235http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17223#respond


12/14



of those who would be saved, and the number of those so chosen cannot be

increased or diminished. In due time, Jesus of Nazareth died on the cross,

and in that sacrifice He secured the salvation of all those chosen for

salvation by the Father. And at some time in the earthly life of each person

so chosen, the Holy Spirit brings that person to life, and enables him to

persevere in holiness to the end. Those covenant members who are not

elect in the decretal sense enjoy the common operations of the Spirit in

varying degrees, but not in the same way that those who are elect do.

We deny that the unchangeable nature of these decrees prevents us from

using the same language in covenantal ways as we describe our salvation

from within that covenant. We further deny this covenantal usage is

pretend language, even where the language and terminology sometimes

overlap with the language of the decrees. The secret things belong to the

Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children,

that we may keep the words of this law. We affirm the reality of the

decrees, but deny that the decrees trump the covenant. We do not set

them against each other, but expect them to harmonize perfectly as God

works out all things in accordance with His will.

Reply

R. Scott Clark, on March 18, 2010 at 12:58 pm Said:

Barbara,

I dont know who it was. I was speaking at a conference in Boise several

years back and a young man, from Moscow, approached me to query me

about the historic Reformed internal/external distinction. I quoted Rom

9 and asked if Esau was elect? He said yes, and that he would have

become eternally elect had he persevered.

This is fairly standard FV doctrine.

Barbara, were not making up this stuff. Its in print. One of the great

regrets of my life is that Ive had to spend the last decade reading the

amateur theology of FV.

In the FV account of covenant theology, the covenant, i.e., the historical

norms the eternal or the decretal. This move has roots in the Schilderite

covenant theology of the 1940s in the Netherlands.

Reply


An unknown young man from Moscow said Esau would have become

elect And this proves that FV writers say the same? They do not. No FV

writer has ever said that one can become elect. The FV Statement is

perfectly clear.

Im sorry, I cant decipher the first sentence of your last paragraph.

Reply


BTW, Dr. Clark, youre attributing the words of an unknown young man

from Moscow to Jim Jordan and others. In fact, what this unknown person

said directly contradicts all FV writings. The statement I quoted above says,

Before all worlds, God the Father chose a great host of those who would be

saved, and the number of those so chosen cannot be increased or

diminished.
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17283http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17282#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17282http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17279#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17279http://www.wscal.edu/clarkhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17277#respond


13/14



Find something written by someone known that indicates the number of

elect can be increased or diminished, and Ill believe you. Until then, Im

convinced you are hearing only what you want to hear.

Reply

rfwhite, on March 18, 2010 at 2:42 pmSaid:

RSC:

In light of Barbara Harveys concern, I wondered if Doug Wilsons

statement in his (Wilsons) Reformed Is Not Enough, p. 139, is what you

have or the young man you cited had in mind. In his book, Wilson

interprets the terms covenantal election and special election by quoting

with approval from Joel Garver, a professor of philosophy at LaSalle

University, who wrote:

[I]n our covenantal election . . . special election is realized and made

known. Thus, we should not drive a wedge between special and

covenantal elections, for special election simply is covenantal election for

those, who by Gods sovereign electing grace, persevere. For those who fall

away, covenantal election devolves into reprobation.

Garvers imprecise wording, cited by Wilson, could be the kind of statement

that led to the young mans comment to you. Cant say for sure, of course,

but the construct of Garver and of the young man appears similar, if not

identical.

Reply

Matthew Colvin, on March 18, 2010 at 3:23 pm Said: Your comment is awaiting

moderation.

No, the origin of the quotation in question is almost certainly from John

Barachs talks at AAPC 2002. It is a quotation from Zwingli, of all people

and it is about how UNCHANGEABLE election is. In fact, it is about exactly

what FV people have always been talking about: knowing ones

unchangeable election through the lens of the covenant. Here it is, from

Zwinglis Refutation of Catabaptist Tricks, quoted in Peter Lillbacks The

Binding of God:

What of Esau if he had died an infant? Would your judgment place him

among the elect? Yes. Then does election remain sure? Yes, and so does

rejection. But listen. If Esau had died as an infant, there would have been

the seal of election. But as it is, we see from the fruit of his unfaith that he

was rejected of the Lord. In vain do we say of Esau, would that he had died

an infant! He could not die whom God had created that he might live, and

live wickedly.

Note Zwinglis emphatic insistence echoed just as emphatically by all the

usual FV guys in their joint statement that election remains sure and

so does rejection.

Will you apologize for misrepresenting the views of FV teachers, Dr. Clark?

Reply

Leave a Reply
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17288#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17288http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17287#respondhttp://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/#comment-17287http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/heidelcast-14-march-2010-clark-keister-on-the-leithart-case-james-jordan-the-theocratic-background-of-the-fv-movement/?replytocom=17283#respond


14/14



Matthew Colvin Name (required)

[email protected] E-mail (will not be published)

(required)

Website

Submit Comment

Notify me of follow-up comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Blog at WordPress.com. Theme: Digg 3 Column byWP Designer
http://www.wpdesigner.com/http://wordpress.com/

rs clark slanders fv teachers

Documents