Uncategorized – Page 93

Random Observations on the Regnant Follie at PCA GA

I viewed a good deal of the PCA GA last week. Below are my random observations. I shall use “ssa” to shorten same-sex attraction.

1.) I was more than a little amazed at the number of Elders who stood up at the PCA GA or later wrote in tweets or blogs and admitted they experienced ssa. Who knew that the PCA had so many ssa Elders?

2.) I was beyond amazed and entering into the territory of being shocked to witness the display of effeminacy on display at PCA GA microphones. My gaydar nearly burnt out a chip trying to keep up. I found myself wondering if these guys were exchanging estrogen-laced recipes between sessions. I’ve seen this kind of thing a few times before at ecclesiastical meetings so I’m no stranger to this phenomenon but I never thought I’d see it at a PCA GA.

3.) It is my conviction that in the end, the PCA GA offered more trimming than substance in what they accomplished at PCA GA. The problem these men (“men ” ?) have is not going to go away short of running the ssa leadership crowd through the church courts one by one.

4.) Overture 23 was a motion to amend the Book of Church Order (BCO) 16 by adding the following clause:

16-4 Officers in the Presbyterian Church in America must be above reproach in their walk and Christlike in their character. Those who profess an identity (such as, but not limited to, “gay Christian,” “same sex attracted Christian,” “homosexual Christian,” or like terms) that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, either by denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction), or by denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, or by failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions are not qualified for ordained office.

This sounds good on the surface but already during the debate some of the ssa crowd were practicing their future evasion technique by saying that they have never claimed as same sex attraction identity insisting instead that they have experienced same sex attraction. The line of reasoning on their part goes this way; “My identity is in Christ but that doesn’t change the fact that I experience same-sex attraction. As such I completely concur that my identity is in Christ but my identity can be in Christ while at the same time experiencing same-sex attraction.” In such a way the ssa crowd can evade the strictures of this new amendment to the BCO. (Also consider that it still has to be affirmed by 2/3 of the PCA Presbyteries in order to be made law.)

I agree that a fair reading of the new amendment to the PCA Book of Church order would shut the door against ssa folks but we have to keep in mind that these people are not going to give the proposed amendment a fair reading. They are going to twist the language going forward just as they have already twisted the language to get to this point. If they have not given a fair reading to Scripture and its clear forbidding of what they have been advocating why would anyone think they are going to give a fair reading of this proposed amendment? A fair reading would require them to leave the denomination en mass right now. They are not going to do that.

5.) Overture 37 was a motion to amend BCO 21-4 and 24-1 by “clarifying the moral requirements for church office.”

Therefore be it resolved that, for the examination of Teaching Elders, BCO 21-4 be amended to add a new sub-paragraph 21-4.e, as follows, with the subsequent sub paragraphs [21-4.e-h] re-lettered [to be 21-4.f-i] (addition underlined):

BCO 21-4.

e. In the examination of the candidate’s personal character, the presbytery shall give specific attention to potentially notorious concerns, such as but not limited to relational sins, sexual immorality (including homosexuality, child sexual abuse, fornication, and pornography), addictions, abusive behavior, racism, and financial mismanagement. Careful attention must be given to his practical struggle against sinful actions, as well as to persistent sinful desires. The candidate must give clear testimony of reliance upon his union with Christ and the benefits thereof by the Holy Spirit, depending on this work of grace to make progress over sin (Psalm 103:2-5, Romans 8:29) and to bear fruit (Psalm 1:3; Gal. 5:22-23). While imperfection will remain, he must not be known by reputation or self-profession according to his remaining sinfulness, but rather by the work of the Holy Spirit in Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 6:9-11). In order to maintain discretion and protect the honor of the pastoral office, Presbyteries are encouraged to appoint a committee to conduct detailed examinations of these matters and to give prayerful support to candidates.

My first instinct on this one is to say that if a denomination has a problem with these kinds of candidates seeking to get into the ministry one has a problem that Presbytery examination is not going to cure. I’m over 60 and I must admit that all of this blows my mind. So many guys want to get into the ministry who are pedophiles, sodomites, porn fiends, and routine fornicators that we have to form special committees to keep all these chaps out?

I would think if one went to all the time and cost to get through Seminary so as to be ordained in the PCA that no committee is going to ferret out this stuff and I’m not sure we want to turn PCA committees into a modern version of the House committee on un-American activities.

Note the section that admits that “imperfection will remain.” I bring this to your attention because some Twit on the floor of GA tried to make the case that these requirements were examples of Wesleyan perfectionism and Keswick higher living leaking into the denomination. Only a Twit could think such a thing.

Elsewhere viewing the PCA GA made me aware of some things that I only feared were true prior to watching the PCA GA in action.

6.) There is no realistic hope of help coming from the “Reformed” denominations. I knew denominations like the CRC or the RCA or the PCUSA etc. were liberal and dead but I had no idea how sick institutionally the “conservative denominations” were.

7.) The PCA and the broader church needs to be viewed as being reflective of the culture and not a leading-edge reforming institution in the culture. I was left slack-jawed by all the testosterone-deprived pajama boy clergy that I saw speak at the PCA GA microphones. The problems in the culture are being not only reflected but nurtured in the Church.

8.) There is no way that most recently freshly minted ministers will ever comprehend how desperate of a situation that the church is currently in. They just don’t have enough life under their belt to understand that the only thing missing on the dead conservative denominations is a grave marker. They are full of hope that the PCA may yet turn around. Those of us who have seen this movie before and who have read about how this has happened repeatedly in history already know how this movie ends. The PCA is NOT going to make a comeback to orthodoxy. Some would say this is pessimism but before you point that finger keep in mind that Sean Michael Lucas teaches future PCA ministers.

9.) The Ministry is still staffed by too many nice guys who will only let their anger show when fighting against racism. There is nothing except racism that finds them experiencing abhorrence. Not even the clearly in-your-face effeminacy which champions mainstreaming the ongoing experience of same-sex attraction by members and clergy is a reality that engenders instinctual repulsion.

10.) I had always dreamed about someday being accepted by the Reformed clergy community. That is clearly never going to happen, and after viewing the PCA GA I no longer want it to happen. My wife reminds me that they want no more part of me than I do of them, so it’s all good. Yes… yes, I know there are exceptions and I’m not the last man standing. I’m talking in general terms and generally speaking I am correct.

11.) Critical thinking skills are as absent in the PCA as they are in the broader culture. Listening to all the non-sequiturs and dumbassery was particularly painful at times. Indeed, there were times I had to quit viewing the PCA GA it was so bad.

Stories From my Wesleyan & Keswick Years — Entire Sanctification

Classic Wesleyan theology teaches that man’s sin nature can be eradicated so that a person no longer sins. Keswick theology teaches that the sin nature can be so suppressed that a person no longer sins. In both Undergrad and Seminary, I had a theology professor (from each tradition) tell the class either, “I have not sinned in 30 years,” or “I cannot remember the last time I sinned.”

The Wesleyans and the Keswicks get away with this by redefining sin down. What most people would call “sin,” they would refer to as a mistake, or an oversight, or an error. For example, if one had a flash of anger that would not be counted as “sin” since it wasn’t premeditated. In such a theology sin is dumbed down to include only premeditated and sustained habitual sins.

Now… the kicker here is when I was in Undergrad with the Wesleyans they were telling their lads who were pursuing their ministry degrees that they would not be allowed to take a Wesleyan pulpit unless they could claim entire sanctification.

What really was curious is that among the Wesleyan profs I had and the Wesleyan ministers I talked to there was no one single definition for Sanctification. I remember once going forward during a service for one of the “Spiritual Emphasis weeks” services asking for entire sanctification from God and having two older ministers talk to me while at the altar giving me two different ways to be entirely sanctified.

Now, keep in mind what you’re going to create if you tell a bunch of 22-year-olds that they have to have “perfect love” in order to get a job.

Yeah… that’s correct. You got the grossest hypocrisy and judgmentalism you can possibly imagine. And that is what I witnessed.

One way this was expressed was the famous Wesleyan “Amen Corner,” which existed during the student-required morning chapels. Nearly all of the Ministry major students would sit in one particular corner of the church for the chapel with their polyester pants (it was also referred to as the polyester corner) and their button-down shirts. We used to count how many “Amens” would resonate from that corner during the chapel service. In such a way we would know how superior or inferior a chapel service we had witnessed. The Wesleyan “Amens” started with the top of the tongue rolling off the roof of the mouth so that a distinct smacking mouth noise would be made followed immediately by a guttural “AMEN.” Of course, something like that just begged to be routinely mocked, and eventually, all of our conversations would be punctuated by frequent tongue smacking and guttural Amens.

Another way this embrace of entire sanctification expressed itself on campus is that we who were not entirely sanctified got all the best girls. The best girls always like best the bad boys and it was easy to be a bad boy with the polyester pants crowd on campus. If one wore ripped jeans and a disco destroyer t-shirt one had a leg up already on the polyester competition. I married the best woman on campus and it was in part because I was a “bad boy,” as compared to the polyester pants brigade.

Another way this entire sanctification among the ministerial students was expressed was the exquisite way that they would look down on you if they thought you were their inferior. The advantage of being entirely sanctified is that one can think they are morally superior to the poor schlubs who are not. Actually, this developed into a contest between the entirely sanctified and the “bad boys” on who could be more condescending towards the other.

For myself and a few friends, all of this definitely became a matter of, “I’d rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints. The sinners are much more fun.” Of course, the polyester pants crowd was NOT entirely sanctified, and as such their personality and character were definitely injured. For all I know they continued believing that bilge to this day and so their characters and personalities remain stunted to this day. One cannot believe theological bushwa and not be injured by it. Even when I knew them these guys were injured goods.

And remember… these injured goods would be piloting Wesleyan pulpits. I can still see their faces and their polyester pants. I can even remember a few first names forty years later. There was a Danny and a Mark and a Wes and a Mike ( I remember Mike [who later got divorced I learned] because during a critique time in the homiletics class he couldn’t resist saying that my crooked mustache was a distraction while I was preaching — just the kind of comment one would expect from the polyester crowd) and a Gerald and a Tim and a Scott and on and on. I hope that they were able to get past their polyester pants beginning and learned that the whole doctrine of entire sanctification is utter horse hockey and that bad theology hurts people

That was my experience with the young Wesleyan clergy and Wesleyan clergy wannabees early on in my life. The Keswick fared little better though I wasn’t around them as long and so didn’t know them as well. I do know that the hypocrisy was just as thick among that stripe of perfectionism.

Apologetics from the Time Capsule… McAtee returns Volley; Leaves Darryl Hart Looking Foolish… Again

“So, to respond to Rabbi Bret, my beef with the CRC and its worldview is not only that it is progressive. I also object to worldviews like Rabbi Bret’s that are politically or culturally conservative because opposing abortion, if done for the wrong reasons, is as much a form of works righteousness as is adopting a mandate on global warming. If Rabbi Bret wants evidence of the way that a right-wing worldviewitis leads to churches fudging the gospel, he only needs to say, “Federal Vision.” Can he do that? Sure he can.”

Dr. Darryl G. Hart
2010

Dr. Darryl seems to be reasoning here that all because there exist progressive worldviews that have no business being in the Church or right-wing worldviews that have no business being in the Church therefore the worldview that insists that worldviews in the church are bad should be the worldview that is in the church. Dr. Darryl is advocating that the Church take up a ‘public square antinomianism worldview’ that if done for the wrong reasons, is as much a form of works righteousness as is adopting either global warming or pro-life positions.

Dr. Darryl (and presumably his other brother Darryl) seems to think that it is possible for the Church to be worldview-free. Yet, as I have been saying relentlessly, it is only Dr. Darryl’s law-oriented worldview that is pushing him to advocate what he advocates. Dr. Darryl’s worldview (public square antinomianism) is law-oriented because he seems to suggest that anybody that does not share his anti-worldview worldview is a someone who can not be saved. So, for Dr. Darryl, a person who does not keep the law of having an anti-worldview worldview is a person who must be born again. At the very least, for Darryl, all sanctified Christians, keep the law with him, which teaches that mature Christians don’t allow the Church to have any worldview in the Church.

Dr. Darryl accuses progressivism to be a worldview that is law and not Gospel and so should not be embraced by the Church. Dr. Darryl accuses right wing worldviews to be worldviews that are law and not Gospel and so should not be in the Church. Dr. Darryl insists that the worldview that advocates no worldview and which says that any law is an acceptable law in his “common realm” is to be preferred over progressivism law or right-wing law.

Dr. Darryl’s problem is that he honestly believes that Christianity, as promulgated in the Church, neither asks nor answers the question, “How shall then we live.” Dr. Darryl’s worldview believes that all attempts by the Church to speak God’s mind on this question for the public square are sinful. The consequence of Dr. Darryl’s worldview is that the Gospel’s impact in saving individual lives reaches no further than those individual personal lives. For Dr. Darryl, a medical doctor is saved by the Gospel but after being saved by the Gospel, Christianity, as promulgated by the church, has no word for the medical doctor on how he should speak about medical ethics. For Dr. Darryl, a public square Economist is saved by the Gospel but after being saved by the Gospel, Christianity, as promulgated by the church, has no word for the Economist on whether Keynesianism is consistent with the 8th commandment. For Dr. Darryl, a civil magistrate is saved by the Gospel but after being saved by the Gospel, Christianity, as promulgated by the church, has no answer for the civil magistrate on whether political or cultural Marxism is consistent with the 1st commandment. For Dr. Darryl the third use of the law, as it pertains to the public square, completely disappears. For Dr. Darryl God speaks clearly on how individuals get saved but God speaks only an incredibly contested word (i.e. – Darryl’s appeal to Natural Law) on how Christians as Christians should live.

Dr. Darrly has not escaped the fact that his worldview for the public square antinomianism that he would have the Church embrace if pursued for the wrong reasons, is as much a form of works righteousness as is adopting a mandate on global warming or as adopting legislation that is pro-life.

False Guilt, Atonement, & Modern Man

When man refuses to look to Christ for atonement for his genuine sin and guilt he will become manipulated by both genuine guilt and subsequent false guilt with the consequence that fallen man will seek to provide self atonement through either sadist or masochist means. Man apart from Christ will either seek to transfer his guilt to others in a pseudo-religious act of humanist atonement or man will masochistically punish himself in an act of attempted self atonement.

The act of masochistic atonement that is being seen right now is the white man seeking to work off his assigned false guilt and provide self atonement by owning the false guilt heaped on by the pseudo idea of “white guilt,” “white privilege,” and “white fragility,” as well as the false notion of systemic racism. Instead of dealing with his genuine sin against the God of the Bible and the resulting guilt by looking to Christ alone as the sin-bearer and guilt remover fallen white man is accepting humanist false guilt and is trying to masochistically work it off by accepting the social order penalties that is currently being heaped on him by the sadistic Cultural Marxist minorities, feminists, and perverts, etc. who themselves are trying to work out their own sin and guilt by sadistically placing it upon the white man.

All of this explains why it is only Reformation and a trusting of Jesus Christ to take away real sin and guilt that can deliver us from our current CRT social order suicide pursuit. As long as fallen man refuses to look to Christ alone who can take away sin he will forever manipulate others with guilt or will be manipulated by guilt all in an attempt to find a way to gain atonement and so rid themselves of a guilt that can never be removed apart from the finished work of Jesus Christ.

You see, no matter how much he promises himself that the most recent innovation of self atonement will finally take away his guilt, he is left with a never-ending sense of guilt. The consequence is that he will continue to be manipulated by Cultural Marxists, WOKE politicians and humanist psychologists with false guilt.

I am convinced that it was this dynamic that found Obama being elected in 2012. Men and women without Christ believed that they could be atoned for by the masochist work of voting for the magic negro Barack Obama who would take sin and false guilt away from self-loathing white people. I am convinced that it is this dynamic that finds white people accepting all the smegma that comes from the CRT toady-drops that are being heaped upon them. I am convinced that a whole lot of the “help people” programs that do-gooders pursue with such conviction that sprout up all around us are a product of guilt not being handled properly.

This reality reminds us that as with all lies, we get swings between rationalism and irrationalism. Sometimes guilt is acknowledged, eg white guilt, and false atonements and mortifications are attempted. Other times guilt is pathologized as a psychiatric illness, and various self-help therapies are adopted to cure this bad feeling and restore self esteem. Neither works, hence the oscillation. One escape is to change the law in one’s mind, to justify and rationalize behavior, usually by hating the victim.

Ultimately guilt can only be healthily confronted in the light of the atonement of Jesus Christ. Only by petitioning for a pardon based on Christ’s death in my place can fallen man admit guilt and say he is worthy of death and yet maintain hope and self-esteem because Christ provided atonement and so died in his stead.

Rushdoony on Psychology

“But what of those who deny that mankind is the standard, and who hold that Biblical faith requires separation and division? The prophets of mental health of this religion of humanity know the answer: they are mentally sick. God’s hell is outlawed, but a new hell has opened up for apostates: mental sickness, with its many mansions. Mental health is so defined that not only political and economic conservatives but all orthodox Christians are clearly sick. Did not Freud say that religious people avoided the personal neuroses by accepting the cosmic neuroses? The fact that they are more responsible, stable and neuroses free is itself proof of their sickness, i.e., acceptance of the cosmic neuroses, God! The prophets of mental health must be given free reign to ‘heal’ mankind by a vast reorganization of the world. The results of the mental health programs have been a steady encroachment on civil liberties of a most flagrant sort. The power of psychiatrist is the foundation of a new and more fearful inquisition. The relationship of the psychiatrist to courts of law is increasingly seen by many as a threat to society. To criticize the mental health movement is to draw fire on oneself as mentally disturbed and also, an added ‘evil’ a champion of political and economic conservatism. This is not surprising. Freud provided two ‘impregnable’ defenses. First, since the questions of man’s nature are biological and not religious; they are therefore expert, medical and not lay problems. A do-it-yourself program may be valid in religion but not in medicine. As a result laymen are denied the right to criticize the mysteries of the mental health program. Second, any resistance to acceptance of his theories was for Freud an infallible sign of truth, for the person was fighting against the exposure of his unconscious with is darkly hidden impulses and sickness. Thus, the critic of Freud merely proved himself guilty. These two techniques of defense have been widely adopted.”

R. J. Rushdoony
Freud – pg. 67-68

1.) The “Discipline” (it really should be called “Fairy Tale”) of Psychology has been used since its inception as a battering ram to destroy Christendom in general and the Christian faith in particular. It has no more credibility now then it did when it started as phrenology with the determining of character by the feeling of bumps on people’s craniums. Psychology is the biggest hoax that has been foisted on Western Man since the serpent walked into the garden selling apples. Whenever I hear the word “psychology” I reach for my revolver.

2.) The absolute worthlessness of psychology doesn’t mean there aren’t people who are seriously twisted. But saying that psychology shows its worth by being able to identify twisted people is like arguing that my broken clock shows its worth by being able to identify the right time twice a day. Hey people, even a blind old sow can find an acorn once in awhile.

3.) Theodoro Adorno’s “Authoritarian Personality” along with other input from the cultural marxist movement has been a large influence on the shrink community. The cultural Marxists have been successful at using psychology and psychiatry to pathologize all that once was and in point of fact remains normal. As I have it in the bold print above, all conservative expressions, any belief in absolute truth descending from a personal God, all rants against psychology (including this one) putatively proves that people are clinically sick to the people who have been designated as the official “pointers out of sick people.”

4.) If the Church is supposed to hold the keys to the Kingdom, increasingly it is the case that the shrinks hold the keys to the Church. Increasingly, denominations are requiring their ministry candidates to be funneled through a gauntlet of psychological tests, psychologists, psychologist recommendations, psychologist sessions and psychologist cow pies. Some day, if Reformation ever comes, people are going to look back at this and laugh at all the money, time, and talent wasted due to this psychology charade. All of this is the concrete expression of what Rushdoony above calls “the new and more fearful inquisition” of our times.

5.) As a professional, I have met many many of these types of people. I have yet to meet one who has anything approaching a Biblical worldview. This is scary given the fact that this “discipline” is required for almost any professional field of study anymore. The inmates are running the asylum.

6.) Finally, its pretty good work if you can get it when you can be in a career where if people disagree with you it proves that you are right, since their disagreement reveals their unwillingness to accept the truth, and where if people agree with you it proves that you are right.

The acceptance of psychology and psychiatry in my estimation more than anything else proves that people are lemmings and will believe anything. Psychiatry is a hoax and yet if you just keep repeating the lie long enough and loud enough that it is profound and insightful everybody follows along.

I’m not following.