revmary

Continuing our consideration of some of the arguments heard during last Friday’s General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission appeal hearing, in the matter of Parnell et al v. San Francisco Presbytery, it’s time to move on to the question of the interpretation of Scripture. The most common claim made by folks willing to accept the ordination of homosexually active individuals is that “there are many interpretations of only a few isolated passages of Scripture, and it is wrong to impose one of those interpretations (yours) on the whole church.” Several comments can be made in response to this assertion: 1. In […]

Conscience is often thought of as the inner voice of reason and morality guiding a person to right action. Whether this is an adequate definition I leave to my readers, but it raises the question of whether the “inner voice” has any accountability to an “outer voice.” It also begs the question of the human capacity for self-deception. Gordon Smith, in the introduction to his book The Voice of Jesus,[1] asks two provocative questions he thinks every Christian should be able to answer: first, What do you think Jesus is saying to you? and second, How do you know it’s

The first Historic Principle of Church Order in the PCUSA Book of Order harkens back to the Westminster Confession (Book of Confessions, 6.109), to declare that “God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in anything contrary to his Word, or beside it, in matters of faith or worship.” An improper understanding of this principle leads to the claim that one’s “conscience” overrides any other person’s application of Scripture. This translates to “nobody can tell me with any authority that I am wrong; my conscience is my

The present controversies in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) [hereafter and forever referred to as PCUSA] have developed along a continuum for decades, starting with the Fundamentalist/Modernist debates of the 1920s. At the time, the church decided not to require ministers (teaching elders) to subscribe to the five fundamentals (you know: the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the virgin birth, miracles, etc). It was an unfortunate adjustment 1° off of True North. The long-term significance of this change of course went unrecognized during a time of fairly homogeneous agreement about the essential tenets of the Reformed Faith. However, as Presbyterian history has