FROM THE EDITORS

... continued fiWll page 2

One of the things you will have already noticed is
that we are introducing a change in our presentation.
Our desire is to make the magazine easy to navigate
and reader friendly. As the Lord provides, we wish
to progress toward a more typical magazine format,
using more color and perhaps even slick inside pages.
These ideas will depend on subscription growth and
continued as well as increasing support from our many
faithful patrons.
Our Apologies
We realize that for some time now we have
advertised this magazine as "monthly" and yet have
been producing it every other month and lately not
even that often. We offer our sincerest apologies
and ask the forgiveness of all our readers. Any who
wish to do so may request appropriate refunds for
the unpublished issues. We will no longer advertise
ourselves as monthly. However, we do intend to
publish on a more regular schedule, starting with every
other month and then, as God allows in His kind
providence, we hope to reinstitute a monthly schedule.
We anticipate completing the year with this issue
(July / August) plus two more (September/October
and November/December). Depending on God's
provision through our readers' generosity, we are
renewing our efforts and energy to push forward.
The Current Controversy
In this issue, we are devoting a number of pages
to topics pertinent to the current controversy over
the teaching of several "Reformed" pastors. As the
result of studying closely the public teachings of these
pastors, Covenant Presbytery of the RPCUS (the
Reformed Presbyterian Church in the United States)
recently issued two resolutions, one condemning the
teachings and the other calling for their repentance
(both of the resolutions are reprinted in this issue).
The overall response to these resolutions saddens
me deeply. Very few people have discussed the issues
at hand but instead have chosen to deflect criticism
with personal attacks or by focusing on perceived
deviations from appropriate procedures. One of the
accusations has been that these men have been labeled
heretics without a trial. This is incorrect, instead they
have been said to teach heresy. The heresies they are
4 the COUNSEL of CHALCEDON
advocating were labeled such in trials and councils
held centuries ago.
The other accusation has been regarding
procedure. Some have said that the RPCUS failed
to follow appropriate procedure, some even alleging
that Matthew 18 was violated. As one person recently
remarked, it is as if a witness to a capital crime is being
forbidden to testify because he double parked on
arrival at the courthouse. Whether there has been any
actual double parking is doubtful (see Brian Abshire's
article on the application of Matthew 18 to public sin
in this issue). It is far more important to discuss the
doctrinal errors in question than these other detracting
issues. If anyone indeed has any personal offense in
their craw, they are the ones in need of practicing
Matthew 18 directly rather than discussing the offense
publicly with others (especially over the internet). In
the mean time, we will confine ourselves, as before, to
discussing the actual error involved in doctrine rather
than personally attacking anyone.
The challenge has been made to show whether
these men have been appropriately understood. This
issue will provide detailed support for concerns over
the doctrinal accuracy of the new teachings, and more
will be forthcoming in subsequent issues. Additional
help for those struggling with the current controversy
is available at www.rpcus.com and www.chalcedon.org.
Readers should be sure to read the reprint in this issue
of Joe Morecraft's editorial introduction from the
recently published Nel}! S oNthern Presbyte!ian Revielv.
This is not a mere difference of opinion. At stake
is the definition of the way of salvation. To borrow an
analogy from my dear friend Kyle Dixon, this is not
about the color of the carpet, the size of communion
cups, or pews vs. chairs. It is about the question
''What must I do to be saved?" Paul did not, in answer
to the Phillipian jailer, instruct him in the error of his
question. Rather, he answered it simply, "Believe in the
Lord Jesus and you shall be saved, you and your house."
Perhaps, as some have suggested, there is mere
carelessness and imprecision involved. This is
highly doubtful, but even if these arrows of doctrine
have been shot carelessly, they have landed in the
very throne room of the King. And we are duty
bound to defend the King against all attacks. Q1
-Mark D. Anthon)) St:
What's So
Controversial About
the New Controversy?
By Joe Morecraft III
Note: This article original!JI appeared as Joe Morecrcift's
introductory note in the recent inaugural issue oj 'The New
Southern Presf?yterian Review".
M
y heart hurts as I write this, but I must
because the truth of the g o ~ p l is at stake
(Galatians 1 :6-1 0). In the w1nter of 2002
the Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church Pastors'
Conference took place in Monroe, Louisiana. The
speakers were Steve Wilkins, Steve Schlissel, Douglas
Wilson, and John Barach. Norman Shepherd was
supposed to be one of the speakers but he was
providentially hindered in the loss of his wife. Since
then we have often prayed that God would bring him
comfort.
I have carefully listened to all the lecture tapes
of this conference and have read related material by
some of the lecturers. I have spent hours studying
the roots of the perspective presented at this
conference. I earnestly and sadly believe that what
was presented by these men, all of whom have made
major contributions to the advance of the Reformed
Faith in the late Twentieth Century, represents at
best a blurring of the gospel of Christ, and at worst,
a betrayal of that gospel. This is not to say that
all they presented was in error, but it is to say that
misrepresentations, caricatures, reckless statements,
deceptive statements and departures from the truth of
God were intermixed with the good things they said.
This makes their statements all the more dangerous,
since careful discernment is necessary to distinguish
truth from plausibly expressed falsehoods.
Those aspects of the gospel that were blurred or
redefined in an unbiblical manner 'by the speakers of
the AAPC Pastors' Conference included: the nature
of justification, the role of faith in justification, the
relation of faith and works, the meaning of baptism,
the eternal security and perseverance of the saints,
the nature of revelation, the unity of the covenant
of grace, the difference between the Old Testament
the COUNSEL of CHALCEDON 5
What's So Controversial About the New Controversy?
and Judaism, the relation of Law and Gospel, and
the nature and goal of evangelism. Closely related to
these issues was the caricaturing of the "sol as of the
Reformation" and the Westminster Standards as Greek
and Hellenistic misinterpretations of. the teaching of
the \'Vord of God, which Standards must, at best, be re-
cast according to these men's innovative perspective or,
at worst, cast aside completely in order for the gospel to
be presented effectively with its full antithetical nature
to the 21
5t
Century.
Lest you think all this is an exaggeration or
misrepresentation on my part, consider the following
comments made at various times by the speakers from
the 110nroe pastors' conference. I will be accused of
taking these quotes out of context, but I assure you that
their context does not make them any less erroneous.
But how do you know that God chose you? The
answer is that you've had the special experience.
You've been baptized. All God's salvation-from
election to glorification-is found in
All this [John 15] means that a man can be genuinely
attached to Christ and yet bear no fruit. He is as
attached as the fruit-bearing branch is. They both
partake of the root and fatness of the tree. Sap
flows to both branches. The fruitless branch tastes
the heavenly gift. He has been enlightened (Heb.
6:4). And when the process of apostasy comes to
completion, he tramples underfoot the blood of
the covenant l?Y }vhich he }vas sanctified (Heb. 10:29).
Douglas Wilson, S tllmbling into Aposta.ry, CRE-
DENDAAGENDA, Vol. 13, Number 2, p. 16
... reading the Bible this way, and in this sense, we
can speak of baptismal regeneration... By our
baptism we have been reborn in this sense-having
died with Christ, we've been raised with Him.
... because by baptism-by baptism-the Spirit
joins us to Christ. Since He is the elect one, and
the church is the elect people, we are joined to
His body, we therefore are elect. Since He is the
justified one, we are justified in Him.
Steve Willdns, The Legary of the Ha!f-Wqy
Christ. And when you were baptized,
God promised to unite you to Jesus
Christ. That's what it means to be
baptized into Christ. You're united
to Jesus and all His salvation is for
you. At baptism, God promises
that you're really one of His
elect ... Doubting your election when
God has promised it to you is sin;
... good works ... are nev-
ertheless necessary for
salvation from eternal
Covenant, lecture delivered at the Auburn
Avenue Pastors' Conference.
Does the LORD delight in the solas
as much as in obeying the voice of
the LORD? To obey is better than
sacrifice, and to heed is better than
the systems of men.... Do not trust
condemnation and there-
fore for justification ...
Norman Shepherd
- John Barach, answering a letter
to the editor on www.messiahnyc.org, http:/ /
www.messiahnyc.org/ article. php?sid = 162
Our goal is not to get people to believe in something
called Christianity. Here I am drawing on a couple
of essays, one by Mark Horne ... and another by
Peter Leithart, called, 'Against Christianity For
the Church.' The Bible does not say anything
about Christianity; it talks about the Church.
- John Barach, Covenallt and EvangelislJl, lecture
delivered at the Auburn Avenue Pastors'
Conference
A theological liberal in .a mainstream
denomination should be considered covenantally
a Christian, even though he denies the virgin
birth, the substitutionary death of Christ,
the resurrection, and the final judgment.
Douglas WilsonJlldas JJ!as a Bishop, in CREDENDA
AGENDA, Vol. 13, Number 2, p. 12
6 the COUNSEL of CHALCEDON
in deceptive words and say, "The solas
of the Reformation, The solas of the
Reformation, The solas of the Reformation."
Steve Schlissel, We lJIust be Christians, Not Hellenists,
p. 9, unpublished paper.
Because faith which is not obedient faith is dead
faith, and because repentance is necessary for the
pardon of sin included in justification, and because
abiding in Christ by keeping his commandments ...
are all necessary for continuing in the state of
justification, good works, works done from
true faith, according to the law of God ... are
nevertheless necessary for salvation from eternal
condemnation and therefore for justification ...
Norman Shepherd, Thi11Yjour Theses on Justification
in Relation to Faith, Repentance and Good Works,
http://www.hornes.org/ theologia/ content/
00000076.htm
The viewpoint of these men, and others within the
Evangelical and Reformed camp, stems from their own
What's So Controversial About the New Controversy?
readjustments of a movement that is oyer thirty years
old called by its representatives "The New Perspective
on Paul." Its representatives include I<iister Stendahl,
Ed Sanders, James Dunn,N.T Wright, and Daniel
Fuller along with several others. .It has been refuted
time and again as I demonstrate in the bibliography at
the conclusion of my article in the RevieJv, Justification l?J
faith Alone: The Heart of the Gospel of God.
Because of the critical importance of these issues,
the first issue of The New S ottfhern Presl?Jterian RevieJv was
given to an answer to these new views. We hoped to
show, by God's grace, that no reason has been given to
reject the historical Reformed Faith expressed in the
Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, as
has been shown by scholar after scholar. We attempted
to expose the errors of "The New Perspective on Paul"
and the "Hypercovenantalism" of the Monroe pastors'
conference and exegetically answer them. Our method
was more a setting forth of the truth than a pointing
out of the errors, though many of the errors were more
directly addressed in footnote form.
My point is this, as I say in my article in the RevieJv:
A choice must be made between "The New
Perspective on Paul" movement and the historic
Reformed Faith as represented in the Westminster
Standards. Those who are trying to hold in tension
their adaptation of the New Perspective with their
commitment to the Reformed confessions are
being theologically schizophrenic, perhaps, out of
fear or hesitancy of casting off the old views too
quicldy. But, if the history of theology teaches us
anything, it is that when a generation of men begin
to innovate in theology, trying to keep the new and
the old in balance, the next generation will be more
consistent with their theological innovations, and
with that consistency will cast off the old.
In conclusion, Doug Wilson's advice should be taken
by all of us:
So the doctrinal qualifications of an elder require
him to hold fast to the faithful word. He must not
be swayed away from the gospel; he must hold to
it firtl)ly. In this, he is not to be an 'original thinker"-he
should hold to the Word as he was taught.-
Therefore an elder tnust have a jirm understanding of
the conseqtiences of ideas.-It is interesting that our
Lord compared the teaching of the Pharisees and
to leavell, Matthew 16:12. Leaven, or
yeast, is not dormant. Leaven in a loaf of bread
grows and works through the loaf until it pervades
the whole. False teaching works in the same way.
This means that an elder must be able to understand
not only where a particular doctrine is, but also
where it is going. - Elders must therefore have an
ability to identify and grasp subtle error. - Error is
at its most dangerot/s Jvhen it seelJJS most plat/sible. - As
one of the guardians of the lampstand, Revelation
2:1-6, an elder !lIust therifore exhibit a love for Chltst and
a love for the truth of His gospel. This will, of course,
result in collisions with those who do not love the
truth (Acts 5:28). the central teaching purpose of
Ch,tstian elders is the declaration of truth to the saints,
because that truth is loved, and flot a !lIere zeal for the
riftttation of errol: It is not enough to hate the deeds
of the Nicolaitans.
Mother Kirk: Essqys and Forqys in Practical Ecclesiology,
pp. 175-177 (Emphases mine) Gl:1
tile of CHALCEDON
www.chalcedon.org/counsel
Secrets
There they lelY,
Squiltning in the light,
Black eels 6n the sand.
You had hidden them long,
Incubating them In the
Black deet::!ofyour silence.
Your battered
thE: fisherman's boat when he came,
Tossing him upon your waters .
. Now they lay there dying in the light,
His fishing finally fruitful.
MarkAnthony
1989
the COUNSEL of CHALCEDON 7