17 March 2021
.
.
“But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand.” [Ezekiel 33:6]
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” [Ephesians 6:12]
Presbyterians Week Headlines
[2] Church of Jailed Pastor Charged Again for Refusing to Turn People Away
[5] Critical Race Theory vs. the Bible
[6] Scottish Ministers ‘Crossed Line’ by Criminalising Public Worship Court Told
—
Next week, the California Department of Education will vote on a new statewide ethnic studies curriculum that advocates for the “decolonization” of American society and elevates Aztec religious symbolism—all in the service of a left-wing political ideology…
https://www.city-journal.org/calif-ethnic-studies-curriculum-accuses-christianity-of-theocide
+ City Journal, 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, New York 10017, 212-599-7000, questions@city-journal.org
[2] Church of Jailed Pastor Charged Again for Refusing to Turn People Away
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police again charged GraceLife Church in Alberta on Wednesday for refusing to close their doors to congregants and members of the public.
According to the Edmonton Journal, on March 4, 2021 the legal counsel for the church was served with a summons to attend Stony Plain provincial court on May 5, 2021.
The church was charged for exceeding fifteen percent allowable capacity for services held on February 21 and 28, 2021 in defiance of the Public Health Act, the Journal noted.
Read More:
https://caldronpool.com/church-of-jailed-pastor-charged-again-for-refusing-to-turn-people-away/
[Editor’s Note: It was announced today, 14 March 2021, that GraceLife Church Pastor James Coates has had all but one charge dropped, and has been released from the maximum security prison where he has been held since his original arrest.]
+ Edmonton Journal, 10006 – 101 Street, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
T5J 0S1, 780-498-5500, Contact Page
Revelation 3: 14-19 “14And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; 15I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: 18I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. 19As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.”
The Vision 2020 Team was formed by RCA General Synod 2018, tasked with exploring future scenarios for the RCA in light of significant divisions among RCA congregants and congregations mostly concerning toleration and affirmation of unbiblical sexual practices.
The team initially looked into three future scenarios for the RCA: staying together, radical restructure, and grace-filled separation. After thousands of hours of research, discernment, and feedback, they arrived at a combination of the three.
The team released its report and recommendations on June 30, 2020. Read the report.
The Vision 2020 report is now scheduled to be considered at the 2021 RCA General Synod (GS) meeting scheduled for October 2021. In preparation for the upcoming report consideration, the GLCC is preparing an overture regarding the report, and the following letter was issued to GLCC members on 12 March 2021 by GLCC President Dan Sewell:
An Important Message from the GLCC President,
I must apologize that as we’ve been working on the details and quickly disseminating information beforehand, we sent out a “cold” document containing a potential overture to the October GS meeting without a “warm” preface. The plan was to flesh out this overture at our training and prayer gathering on March 16th and then solicit questions prior to actual discussion and potential voting at the official business meeting on the 23rd. This has created some immediate reaction and confusion that I’d like to address in a personal and practical way.
We’re simply asking that you prayerfully process and approach this Overture with an open mind. I recognize that in this long period of conflict we’ve become quick to fall into “labeling” everything that comes out as being about “right and left.” I’d suggest we try to avoid assigning the conservative, moderate, liberal, and progressive labels that are so general and often inaccurate. These are “hot” labels that mirror the political landscape we live in. We can better listen to one another and perhaps build trust with one another if we acknowledge that we ourselves resent being labeled, and should therefore be hesitant to label others and their ideas quickly.
I will attempt to lay out the rationale for this proposal and what it hopes to accomplish. We’ve seen so many plans and proposals coming from the extreme ends of the conflict that we might miss that this re-visioning of R1 from the 2020 report is not meant to be either divisive or an appeal to the fringes. This is for the middle: People who don’t want their churches voting on human sexuality and wish to retain the current standards and principles of the RCA with integrity.
The Overture – an overview:
This can be accomplished without a BCO change: Broadly speaking, the formation of Regional Synods is an administrative power of the General Synod. The formation and arrangements of classes is an administrative power of the Regional Synod. We do not need a 2/3 majority or years of wrangling to get this done. It seems unlikely any of the other 2020 recommendations in their current form could get passed.
This invites the vast majority in the “Middle Ground” to simply stay put: There is strong evidence that the vast majority of our churches concur with the current RCA standards, creeds and confessions, and statement on human sexuality . Let me be frank: Short of solemnizing same sex marriages and issues of ordination, these standards provide wide latitude for grace filled ministry to broken people by recognizing this means everyone. I’d add that our reformed understanding of Truth and Grace is prohibitive of judgment as we humbly pursue salvation by faith in Christ with all, encouraging them to seek his will in every aspect of life.
For GLCC churches who concur with these current standards, no congregational poll, vote, or declaration will become necessary. Unless a church finds itself at odds with these standards and wishes to function in ways inconsistent with current RCA polity, no action is necessary.
This restores integrity to those on both sides of the issue: In the present environment, those churches who have decided differently on these issues and reside in a classis that is supportive of their practices in terms of marriage and ordination simply function in discord with the RCA’s ecclesiastical polity. Others may find themselves in conflict with their own classis in these issues. These would at least be afforded the opportunity to regain integrity within a regional synod that has established an affinity with their theological perception and practice.
This would in effect take the R1 concept of affinity classes to its logical conclusion and remove an additional layer of conflict, as each classes would be in a regional synod that is in agreement. For those who concur with RCA polity and those who wish to modify it, each would be afforded the opportunity to pursue their mission with this same level of integrity
This is better than 3 Regional Synods. Our Canadian siblings must necessarily remain distinct for legal and practical reasons. But some will ask why we wouldn’t create more affinity synods? Why not 3 or 4? Maybe partition right from center-right, from center-left from left? Not only is this more divisive, you suddenly do need a slew of congregational votes. Whether or not we are able to entice the polar opposites to remain, this split is simply between current RCA policy and those who can no longer agree with it as it stands.
While I would suggest the advantages for the disagreeing churches is a lessening of conflict and a return to the integrity of having staled polity, this is most intended as an attractive solution for the many in the middle who wish to turn their attention from this conflict, remain reformed under all of our current standards and confessions, and get back to fruitful mission without complex political procedures.
The reality is this split is occurring already. Unmanaged, it will splinter us. This recommendation is to approach it like cutting a diamond in hopes of producing jewels of great value. The other way will be much like smashing a rock, leaving behind only rubble.
I do not resonate with the inference in the 2020 report that we need to let churches thinking about leaving leave, and then have a conversation as as family. I find that picture tragic and counter intuitive to the Gospel. This is meant to provide a means to have a reasonable conversation about a viable means to remain “Defined and connected” that may offer hope to some who would decide to remain among us.
Friends, I get it! I don’t want this. But I refuse to accept the fatal diagnosis for the RCA without pursuing a therapeutic solution. And I personally never want my congregation to be forced to vote on some declaration one way or another to leave or stay or throw down on these issues. Nothing! Period. The goal is to have this administrated with minimal need for legislation and with isolated drama.
This will not resolve all the issues of human sexuality, but this truly is a prayerfully crafted solution for moving forward in the good order of the church, and a way to love others through our differences as we turn our attention from the conflict, remain reformed in this best fashion, and get back to fruitful mission.
I thank you for your care and concerns for Christ’s mission, and pray that we can arrive at the “win-win” that has been so elusive. What’s not elusive is the victory in Christ that is the result of our faith alone. In this, we all agree.
God Bless,
Dan Sewell 2020-21 President of the GLCC
If the proposed overture or a similar one is adapted by GLCC and the RCA, rather than being a “victory in Christ” described in the letter’s conclusion will actually be the lukewarmness that Christ’s promises to “spue…out of [His] mouth,” that will make the RCA “wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.
Christ instead commands his church to “buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.”
+ Reformed Church in America, 4500 60th Street Southeast, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49512, 800-968-6065, questions@rca.org
+ Great Lakes City Classis, 616-541-0846, office@glcclassis.org
Few of us understand how truly evil and tyrannical public officials can become in their efforts to appease the LGBT movement’s unbridled obsession with pushing their agenda on children. Unfortunately, most people don’t contemplate that previously unimaginable excesses by the state (as writers like Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn warned us) are never too far away.
The government of Canada has decided that if a parent does not cooperate with his minor child’s decision to have a sex-change operation, he will face criminal punishment – including prison time…
https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/21a/Rob-Hoogland-facing-jail/index.html
+ Mass Resistance, Post Office Box 1612, Waltham, Massachusetts 02454
781-890-6001, Contact Page
[5] Critical Race Theory vs. the Bible
Critical race theory is a Marxist philosophy and program to tear down all existing biblically-influenced societal, political, and government structures and to replace them with the “new man,” a mythical ideal society. It is “critical” in that it aims to criticize all existing structures. It is a “race” theory in that it divides men into “races” and claims that certain races, particularly the white “race” and those who are aligned with the white “race,” are inherently evil. It is a theory in that it is not a fact. It should be called Critical Race Hypothesis, because a theory at least has some basis in fact, whereas Critical Race Theory has none. A chief tactic is divide and conquer, but it uses any tactic that is effective, including lies, slander, ridicule, theft, threat, repression, terrorism, and murder.
It respects no law. It has no love. It takes many forms so as to infiltrate and deceive. It is Black Lives Matter. It is Antifa. It is the 1619 Project. It is leftist college courses. It is historical revisionism in the public schools. It seeks to pit females against males, blacks against whites, mothers against fathers, children against parents, teachers against parents, singles against married, Democrats against Republicans, young against old. It seeks to legalize and empower unrighteousness and moral filthiness. It hates the Bible. It seeks to destroy the traditional family, the New Testament church, home schooling and private education, the Bill of Rights, personal liberty, a stable government of law and order, Republicanism, capitalism, economic stability. Anything that corrupts, harms, or destroys these things is considered good, because that is the immediate goal. It is arrogant and domineering. Critical Race Theory is being taught in Southern Baptist seminaries (“Former ERLC Scholar Says,” Capstone Report, March 13, 2020). Yet Critical Race Theory is contrary to the Bible’s teaching and therefore must be rejected by every Bible believer. The Bible is not a theory; it is the infallible Word of God. Following are some of the biblical truths that contradict Critical Race Theory: All men have one father, Adam; there is only one “race” of men (Acts 17:26). All men are equally sinners before God; none are righteous; none are superior (Romans 3:10-18, 23). God made man male and female (Genesis 1:27). It is an unchangeable biological fact. Homosexuality is a perversion of God’s plan and is destructive to individuals and society (Romans 1:26-28). Men are to respect laws and obey authority (1 Peter 2:13-17). God forbids dishonor of parents, murder, adultery, stealing, lying, and covetousness (Exodus 20:1-17). Men are to love God and love other men as neighbors (Matthew 22:37-40).
+ Way of Life Literature, Post Office Box 610368, Port Huron, Michigan 48061, 519-652-2619, fbns@wayoflife.org
[6] Scottish Ministers ‘Crossed Line’ by Criminalising Public Worship Court Told
A judge has heard on the first day of a full judicial review hearing that Scottish Ministers ‘crossed a line’ when they made the decision to criminalise public worship and give police maximum powers to enforce it.
Supported by the Christian Legal Centre, 27 Scottish church leaders, from a range of Christian denominations, have brought the action stating that the closures are unlawful and continue to breach Human Rights law and the Scottish constitutional law.
Janys Scott QC, representing the church leaders who have brought the claim, argued in her submissions that ‘irreparable damage’ had been done to the church leaders and congregations, which is growing in seriousness each day the regulations are in place.
Scott QC described it as a ‘rather alarming proposition’ that: ‘Were the church to assemble, it could be required to disperse. Were any members of a congregation to resist, they could potentially be forcibly removed to their homes.’
She described the powers given to the police to enforce these measures as a ‘maximalist approach’ which has violated their human rights and trespassed on the clear separation of powers between the church and state in the Scottish constitution.
The line between civil and spiritual has been crossed, she argued, and the state has exceeded its constitutional authority.
She argued that this interference is unlawful, and that the Scottish Ministers lack the constitutional power to make them cease to worship.
The freedom of the church to manage its own affairs, as explicitly outlined in Scotland’s constitutional law, she argued means that the:
‘Coronavirus Act 2020 cannot authorise regulations which relate to matters within the exclusive jurisdiction of the church, and the Local Levels Regulations and the Closure Regulations are unlawful, in so far as they purport to require the closure of places of worship. By completely preventing the church carrying out essential spiritual and ecclesiastical functions in the form of assembly, communion, baptism and congregational ministry, they trespass into matters that are in law, the sole province of the church.’
Making the argument that Covid-19 affects all parts of the United Kingdom, Mrs. Scott QC pinpointed that no other part of the United Kingdom ‘currently requires places of worship to close. No other part of the United Kingdom criminalises the opening of a place of worship for the purpose of worship, or the attendance at the place of worship for the purpose of worshipping together with others.’
Furthermore, she cited a number of successful international cases from the past year which have upheld the right to communal worship, even in the middle of a pandemic.
She argued that there is a growing international jurisprudence that banning public worship is disproportionate, unlawful and represents clear government overreach.
Despite Nicola Sturgeon announcing this week that gathered worship would be allowed with restrictions from March 26, Mrs. Scott QC argued that there have been no assurances or guarantees that similar restrictions will not be enacted in the future.
As a result, in closing her submissions, she called on the court to provide a ‘principle’ judgment in the case. She stated that especially during times of crisis there is a duty to hold governments to their constitutions.
She concluded that if a church cannot meet in assembly, it ceases to exist, and called on the court to provide immediate relief.
The church leaders seek a declarator that the closure of churches in Scotland are unlawful, that church closure regulations must be reversed, and that a person may lawfully leave their home to attend a place of worship without fear of prosecution.
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said: “The church leaders’ case raises a paramount constitutional issue of the church liberties and independence from the state. Never before this pandemic did secular authorities assume the power to ban or permit church services and sacraments. This constitutional principle must be protected for the benefit of present and future generations.
“Until this point the Scottish Ministers have had no answers to justify banning church worship. There has been no understanding of what it means to be a Christian. The Scottish Ministers regulations have placed the church in the same category as a social service and sees it as no different from a betting shop.
“This blanket ban must be justified, as currently the reasons are vague, speculative and disproportionate. We look forward to hearing the Scottish government’s submissions tomorrow.”
+ Christian Concern, 70 Wimpole Street, London W1G 8AX, England, 020 7935 1488, Contact Page
Comments are closed for this Article !