More on LA Presbytery stuff
Another person, linking to the response by Beisner, et al, says, “Here is a helpful response regarding clarification of the Louisiana Presbytery’s apparent, quasi exoneration of Wilkins, here.”
I have to laugh at this, too. Apparent, quasi exoneration?
“That Rev. Steve Wilkins be publicly exonerated by Louisiana Presbytery, and declared to be faithful to the Confessional standards of the PCA.“
Yeah… I can see that. apparent. quasi. 
When you’ve already been judge and jury yourself, of course you aren’t going to respect authoritative church judgements. So fuzzy modifiers have to be inserted to settle the soul.
![[caedmonscall.net]](http://rmfo-blogs.com/images/ccneticon.jpg "The official unofficial fan site of Caedmon’s Call.")
![[derekwebb.net]](http://rmfo-blogs.com/images/dwneticon.jpg "The official fansite of Derek Webb.")
![[rmfo-blogs.com]](http://rmfo-blogs.com/images/rmfoblog.png "About the [rmfo-blogs.com] service.")
4 comments
We can almost imagine, if we try really hard, what it must be like to have little regard for the authority of church judgments when those judgments run contrary to our own opinions.
While it’s true a public exoneration by a presbytery is not to be shrugged off as of no consequence, it’s also worth keeping in mind that Episcopalian bishop John Shelby Spong has been brought up on formal heresy charges in HIS denomination and likewise exonerated.
Trouble is, his exoneration says more about his denomination than it does Bishop Spong. Are we to say that because he was exonerated, his views are therefore, and of necessity, orthodox?
I don’t think so.
ISTM the LORD has provided Spong for the purpose of reminding us that while just because someone has charges brought against him doesn’t equate into “guilty, guilty, guilty!” – even in the civil sphere it should be remembered that arrested and indicted is NOT convicted – neither does a denomination’s approval guarantee orthodoxy.
Anne’s tuppence, and worth every dime. ;^)
You’re right, Anne. And if this fellow wants to toss the entire Louisiana Presbytery, or the entire PCA off into hereticland, then I’d commend him for at least being consistent. But that isn’t case.
Plus, it’s not even the point I’m making. This guy doesn’t seem to even accept that the Presbytery fully and completely exonerated Wilkins, and declared him to be in compliance with the Standards.
The Presbytery unequivocally did that, and yet he throws in ‘apparent’ and ‘quasi-’, as if there’s still some question as to wether or not Wilkins was really approved and upheld by his presbytery.
Whether it’s intentional or not I can’t say, but it’s an underhanded ploy to try to (continue to?) cast doubt and suspicion over Wilkins’ good name and standing as a minister of God.
Ah. Sorry. That’ll learn me to come in at the middle of the movie. ;^)
Leave a Comment