PCA Founder John Edwards Richards on Christian Unity

“Christians should be one as God is; God is a Spirit, therefore this is a spiritual oneness for which our Savior prayed. God is a spirit, not a body of different parts, and our unity in Him is a spiritual relationship. It has NOT to do with physical proximity, nor matter, nor color, nor earthly properties. It has to do with the soul of man which God breathed into him, not the body which was made from the dust of the ground.”

John Edwards Richards (1911-1989)
One of the Founders of the PCA
Sermon on Christian Unity

Note Dr. Edwards clearly outlines that the unity of Christians that is expected among Christians is spiritual and not about color. Japanese Christians and Nigerian Christians can have this unity without marrying each other or adopting each other’s children. To transfer and insist on the Christian doctrine of unity into nonspiritual realms, as the NAPARC churches are now doing is to confuse the categories of creation and redemption and is to embrace the vision of unity articulated by Marxist philosophers since the rise of Marx.

There is more of Marx than there is of Christ in the latest ARP effort to rail against the Christianity once and forever delivered unto the saints. I pray that God will open their eyes before they are visited with pestilence for their disobedience.

Rev. Uri Brito Tries to Resurrect Bonhoffer … McAtee Keeps Shoveling the Dirt

Below is one example of what I mean when I talk about how stupid modern “conservative clergy” are. This is from CRE’s Rev. Uri Brito on Dietrich Bonhoeffer,

“But in his own setting, Bonhoeffer was not a theological liberal by the standards of the German academy or the state church. Quite the opposite. He was remarkably conservative relative to the dominant trajectory of German Protestantism in the 1920s and 30s.”

Bret responds,

Bonhoeffer was only “remarkably conservative” when compared to how ultra remarkably liberal the left was during this time. Calling Bonhoeffer “remarkably conservative” then is like saying that Doug Wilson is remarkably conservative today.

What Brito apparently doesn’t realize is that Bonhoeffer was a particular shade of Barthian. The Barthians did not believe in the historicity of redemptive history, instead opting to create a new category of history called “Geschichte.” Brito does not seem to know this. Big surprise. Geschichte (as opposed to Historie) was like the fairy dust that falls off and so emanates from the Historie. It is this Geschichte fairy dust that makes the Historie to be “true” even though it is not true. The Historie can point to the Geschichte the way that a sign on the road can point to a Gas Station (that isn’t really there). However, for Barthians like Bonhoeffer, the Geschichte is enough to convert because when the Geschichte is encountered in a personal event moment then the Gas Station becomes true for the person having the Geschichte encounter event even though the gas station is not objectively real. This is what Barth means by the Geshcichte being a pointer. The event that didn’t happen can serve as a pointer to the impact of the event as if it did happen and someone having that Geschichte encounter moment can now be considered a Christian.

There is no way that any Barthian can be considered “conservative” in the sense of belonging to the tradition of those who believe that redemptive history is true history. In that sense Bonhoeffer was a raging leftist though a leftist quite different than those belonging to Schleiermacher’s ilk.
Brito is either ignorant or stupid.

Rejoicing Over the Fall of Sam Allberry

“Statement from The Gospel Coalition’s Board of Directors

TGC was informed yesterday by Sam Allberry about “an inappropriate relationship with another man a few years ago” and that an announcement would be made today at Immanuel Church regarding his resignation as a pastor.”

Allberry, once an Anglican priest, had wormed his way to Reformed denominations being championed by other sodomite-adjacent clergy, advocating a position styled as “celibate but gay.” The whole side-b sodomy argument denied that the fact that men admitting that they were sexually attracted to other men was sin. The position that Allberry championed was that as long as a man remained celibate, he could continue in the ministry while having this un-natural lust.

That whole thing was warped from the beginning. What made it doubly warped is that so many of the Reformed clergy supported this kind of thinking as seen in the Greg Johnson case in the Presbyterian Church of America (PCA). In the PCA Rev. Greg Johnson took much the same position as Sam Allberry and there was found little will in the PCA to take disciplinary action against Johnson. Johnson finally left the PCA on his own accord taking the congregation he Pastored with him.

All that aside I want to briefly speak to much of the hand wringing that has gone on with the fall of Sam Allberry. In many quarters people are being tongue lashed by the same clergy who simped in support of Allberry and Greg Johson (and others like them) that we should not rejoice in the fall of Allberry. Sarcastic comments like, “Who could have ever seen this coming,” or, “I miss the good old days when clergy were drummed out of their congregations for liking women not their wives” were seen as being in “poor taste,” and “demonstrating a lack of maturity.” We are now being told that we should not rejoiced in the fall of Sam Allberry.

I dissent.

If you can’t rejoice over the fall of Sam Alberry your sentimental pietism is eating up your ability to think straight. The man was leading countless numbers of people into sin. He was mainstreaming sodomy in the “Conservative” “Reformed” denominations. The fact that the nonsense of someone advocating for a “celibate gay” position has been exposed ought to be reason to pop the cork on the finest champagne. It is a good thing that Sam Allbery has fallen if only to keep others from embracing the lunatic position of “gay but celibate.”

Understand the irony that is currently occurring in the PCA churches. This denomination can’t run out on a rail fast enough anyone who embraces the historic position of the church on race-realism while at the same time they couldn’t find the ecclesiastical will to even bring up charges against a man (Rev. Greg Johnson) who had spoken glowingly on the need to accept sodomites in the Church as long as they remained celibate.

It is one thing to admit one’s besetting sin. It is quite another to expect the Church to no longer call besetting sins, “besetting sins.” Men like Allberry and Johnson and their advocacy was proof positive that the Church no longer viewed sodomy or the desire for sodomy to be particularly heinous. The fact that all of this side-b sodomy was a mainstreaming of sodomy is seen in the fact that no one (yet) would use the same logic for side-b bestiality. No one would accept in the Church people who admitted into the mic that they had a physical attraction to farm animals, but it was all ok because they were celibate. Side-b sodomy is just as repulsive as side-b bestiality and yet clergy in the PCA refused to discipline it.

Of course, we pray that Allberry’s repentance after being caught is genuine. Of course we desire his genuine restoration. Despite those realities though we also rejoice that his hypocrisy has been exposed since it means that others won’t fall into the lifestyle he had been advocating.

Yes… I’m happy that Sam Alberry fell.

And so should all Christians.

I am also taking heed of myself lest I fall into some sin.

Clergy & Sabbaticals

There is a good deal of buzz going around on the subject of Pastors expecting and being given sabbaticals.

I think I notice a class division on this subject. Generally speaking, those who are blue collar middle class are rather adamant in their opposition to Pastor’s getting sabbaticals. They seem to think, “Hey, I work just as hard as those pansies do. Why should they get a sabbatical when I work my tail off?” Meanwhile white-collar upper class seem to have less problem with the idea.

I think it might help if the blue-collar chaps realized that the purpose of a sabbatical is not “take a long vacation.” The purpose of a sabbatical is to do in depth research and study to better equip oneself to feed and bless the flock.

Since I’m a Pastor I thought I would weigh in even more.

1.) In 31 years of being in the ministry I’ve never had a sabbatical.

2.) My Father-in-law was in the ministry 40 years and never had a sabbatical.

3.) I seriously doubt the Apostles had sabbaticals.

4.) I don’t begrudge worthy clergy of having sabbaticals since the purpose of sabbaticals is for more learning/research and/or writing a book. The more research is profitable for any congregation the clergy is or will be serving. People may not like to hear this, but it is hard work for a minister to keep on knowing everything he needs to know in order to bless His flock in preaching and teaching.

5.) However, having said #4 my experience has been that the overwhelming majority of clergy don’t do any study/reading/learning of any significance. Frankly, most clergy are dumb people.

6.) I do agree that part of the problem with modern clergy is that they have never worked a non-clergy job. Such clergy thus have little ability, to sympathize with the rigors required of all men in their particular callings. I do understand other working men saying, “What is so special about the clergy that they should get sabbaticals?”

7.) However, it would be to the health of the Church to give a good man who would use the time wisely, periodic sabbaticals.

8.) I see a good deal of penis envy coming from guys not in the ministry complaining about ministers getting sabbaticals. There is a good deal to complain about ministers, but a good minister is doing every bit of work that the non-minister is doing and should not be grumbled over if he gets a sabbatical.

9.) I saw someone throw up the average pay scale for average clergy positions. I can assure you that multitudes of pastors don’t make that kind of money. Not even close.

10.) I would applaud a good minister getting sabbaticals. I would sneer at most ministers getting sabbaticals because most ministers are lousy and dumb and even if they did research and study during a sabbatical the odds are overwhelming that they would be researching and studying what they are researching and studying through the grid of a non-Christian world and life view.

A Conversation With Darrell Dow On The State Of Protestantism

Darrell Dow writes,

I’m uncertain if there is tangible evidence rather than mere anecdote, but it appears that men with rightist convictions about politics and the world (e.g., revelation trumps reason, hierarchy is better than egalitarianism, human nature is not plastic, culture and politics are downstream from peoplehood, etc.) are moving toward Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy. Why? It seems that in the midst of chaos, uncertainty and alienation, they are seeking something that at least has the appearance of order, stability, and tradition.

Bret responds,

1.) There is severe contradiction here. We are told that men with rightist convictions are those who believe revelation trumps reason and yet Rome has never believed in Revelation, choosing instead to own a Thomist position where the intellect is not completely fallen and so reason can cooperate with revelation. Nobody who belongs to Rome as Rightist convictions when it comes to this issue.

2.) Another contradiction is to think that culture is downstream of peoplehood. Culture is theology poured over ethnicity. Neither are downstream of the other but together they forge the stream called culture. If we say that culture is downstream of peoplehood it seems we commit ourselves to a materialistic view of culture.

3.) The word “Appearance” above is key. Rome has always been about the smells and bells and as such shallow people are attracted to things that appear to have gravitas. However, Protestantism has indeed made a mistake here with their often strict iconoclasm (regulative principle-ism) or their often cheesy gimmicky “worship.” It is our own fault that people are leaving Protestantism given the embarrassingly shallow “Bad Neil Diamond concert” that is being offered up as worship in Protestant churches.

4.) People who are indeed fleeing to Rome and Constantinople to find gravitas will soon enough be disillusioned unless they are total mindless bots willing to follow fools in vestments.

DD wrote,

Modern Protestantism sanctifies schism. The slogans semper reformanda and the priesthood of believers, untethered from binding authority, create an ecclesiology in which schism is not a failure but a feature and can be recast as purification, growth, and mission. Every disagreement turns into a hill to die on as men seek to micro-manage the affairs of others rather than leaving that task to an actual priest.

Bret responds,

1.) Rome has every bit the schism in it that Protestants do. The only difference is that Rome is able to keep all this schism in a organizational unity. The unity Rome has is not genuine. Does anybody believe that there is ideological/”Theological” unity that exists between those who still esteem Trent and those who esteem Vatican II? Unity as between the Charismatic Catholics and the Dominicans? Yet Rome keeps all their schism in one tent and then BS’s people that, unlike Protestants, they have unity.

2.) In terms of solutions to problems … well, it all depends on which Priest one gets as to what solution one will get.

3.) This criticism sounds like someone who well understands our problems and wishes that there were other expressions of Christianity that didn’t have those same macro problems. However, Rome is every bit as schismatic, divided, and bedeviled with a lack of authority that anybody respects except as on paper.  How many people really believe that the Priest is the voice of god?

4.) Look, nobody hates more the current condition of the Protestant Church in America but the only thing that is worse than the current Protestant Church in America is the current Roman Catholic church across the world. Same goes for EO.

DD wrote,

Churches become provisional arrangements awaiting correction. An ecclesiocentrism where the church is the center of life becomes one more off-ramp to division. “Church planting” provides the moral alibi because, after all, division is not failure but multiplication! It’s not rivalry, it’s evangelism! The result is an ecclesiology in which impotence is spiritualized, authority becomes like a visit to the buffet, and the gospel is endlessly re-launched.

Bret responds scratching his head,

If you want to avoid ecclesiocentrism don’t go to Rome or Constantinople.

Generally speaking though, I completely agree here. However, I would only add that Rome is all the above minus ever having the Gospel. One could attend the ideal Roman Catholic Church or EO Church and there find the outward trappings to be just fine – even excellent … all the while putting their soul in the hands of demons.

Some people have never studied so as to understand how anti-Christ Rome and EO is. They have never done the reading. When one understands that … when one understands how demonic Rome is, one could never even hint at the superiority of Rome to the real abysmal and ugly failure of modern pseudo-Protestantism.

I do hear though that the Mormons are excellent at unity, church planting, and evangelism.

DD wrote,

On the other hand, one looks at the contemporary denominational landscape within Protestantism and wonders why any prudent group of men would join it at all. The institutions have proven unable either to maintain fidelity or to correct themselves without disintegration. Faced with corrupt and often dumb denominational bureaucracies, reasonable men do what reason permits—they leave! But because exit is the only available tool, it becomes the default setting. The result is not reform but exhaustion, kicking the can down the road for the next division.

Bret responds,

Unfortunately, all true.

DD writes,

Until we recover some credible form of authority–which involves something more than shouting Sola Scriptura– that can punish corruption without demanding perpetual schism, decentralization will remain both necessary and fatal. It’s the very definition of cutting off our nose to spite our face.

Bret responds,

Well, ideally Confessionalism is supposed to be that answer.

Still, in the end I would rather have the problems we have w/ our lack of authority than the problem that would present itself to a return to a time when the Church could be absolutely dead wrong and yet had to be supported upon pain of ostracization or worse.

Most of us hate the current zeitgeist in the Protestant church, but any idea that the false church … the demonic church … the Christ hating Church of Rome and Eastern Orthodoxy is an option that absolutely buries the needle on empty.

I have no problem with cursing the darkness. I just find it unacceptable to hint in any way that even darker darkness is preferred to the darkness we are properly cursing.