Resources on Two-Kingdoms Theology: Defenses and Critiques | Bensonian
Martyred for the Gospel
The burning of Tharchbishop of Cant. D. Tho. Cranmer in the town dich at Oxford, with his hand first thrust into the fyre, wherwith he subscribed before. [Click on the picture to see Cranmer's last words.]
Collect of the Day
LORD God, who seest that we put not our trust in any thing that we do; Mercifully grant that by thy power we may be defended against all adversity; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Anglicans Ablaze: The Anglican Church in North America: An Alternative Episcopal Church
This is the latest article by Robin Jordan over at Anglicans Ablaze:
Click here to read the rest of the article: Anglicans Ablaze: The Anglican Church in North America: An Alternative Episcopal Church
The fundamental declarations of the Anglican Church in North America, the doctrinal provisions of its canons, its Ordinal, and the two reports of its Prayerbook and Common Liturgy Taskforce clearly show that the Anglican Church in North America is following in the footsteps of the Episcopal Church. As I noted in my last article in the series on the ACNA theological lens and the guiding principles behind its proposed Prayer Book, the Anglican Church in North America may be described as an alternative Episcopal Church in which two groups are putting their ideas of ecclesiastical governance, church order, worship, and the like into practice.
These two groups represent two movements that influenced Episcopalianism in the twentieth century. The first movement is the Anglo-Catholic movement. Its origin may be traced to the Tractarian and Ritualist movements of the nineteenth century. The second movement is the Ancient-Future, or Convergence, movement. . . .
Click here to read the rest of the article: Anglicans Ablaze: The Anglican Church in North America: An Alternative Episcopal Church
The Two Kingdoms Theology and Ecumenical Contradictions
Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here." (John 18:36 NKJV)
The Two Kingdoms Theology and Ecumenical Contradictions
At the risk of being considered an isolationist, a fundamentalist, and a divisionist I have decided to write this article to discuss what I consider to be self-contradictory in regards to the two kingdoms theology of Michael Horton and others. While these theologians make strong statements about the separation of church and state and the two kingdoms, namely the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the world, these same men continually make ambiguous statements about what the kingdom of God actually is and who belongs to that kingdom.
The real issue comes down to this: who is in and who is out? Mike Horton did an entire campaign a couple of years ago about Christless Christianity and said that much of Evangelicalism is essentially pelagian due to the influence of Charles Finney. I applauded his efforts. But when Horton came under fire for his views by the wider Evangelical community he backed off that statement and said that Arminians are not really semi-pelagians or pelagian. In fact, Horton has had William Willimon, an Arminian, on the White Horse Inn and he has had David Virtue of VirtueOnline on the program as well. Virtue is an open advocate for Anglo-Catholicism, though he pretends to be an “Evangelical”. If Evangelicalism includes Anglo-Papists, the Eastern Orthodox, and Roman Catholics in addition to the semi-pelagian Arminians, then for all practical purposes the term “Evangelical” is meaningless. The great Anglican Reformed minister, Augustus Toplady called Arminianism, The Road to Rome. If the syncretism of the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement with Christian Science, the prosperity gospel, Word of Faith movement, oneness Pentecostalism, and charismatic Roman Catholicism is part of Evangelicalism, then we are in a world of trouble (2 Corinthians 4:4). Some theologians in the Reformed tradition claim to be non-cessationists. Unfortunately most of them compromise with the errors mentioned above in some way or another. (See Mike Horton: Reformed and Charismatic?).
In light of what I just pointed out above, I am wondering how Horton could appeal to a village green or a big tent if he really believes in the two kingdoms theology? Who actually belongs to the kingdom of God? According to Horton to belong to the village green or the big tent all you need to believe is that the Bible is inspired of God and that it is inerrant and that God is three persons in one divine nature, the statement of faith of the Evangelical Theological Society. (See Doctrinal Basis). Is Horton equating Evangelicalism, the village green, and the big tent with “the kingdom of God”? If so, what is his justification for universalizing what should be particularized by a systematic confessional theology based on a wholistic biblical theology? If all “Evangelical” religion leads to God and Evangelicalism is so heterodox as a whole, then how can it be anything other than a secularizing movement in the church, as Edmund P. Clowney put it in his article, The Politics of the Kingdom?
But this sort of reductionism on the part of Horton and other advocates of the 2k view is troubling. If he thinks that there are two kingdoms, would not the kingdom of God be defined by a systematic confession of what Scripture teaches as a whole? Horton's view of the village green reminds me of the Lambeth Quadrilateral of 1888. That statement was drafted by the Anglo-Catholics and reduced essential doctrine to four main points:
1. The Holy Scriptures, as containing all things necessary to salvation;
2. The Creeds (specifically, the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds), as the sufficient statement of Christian faith;
4. The historic episcopate, locally adapted.
Obviously the Protestant Reformers, being committed to the Scriptures as the final authority in all matters of faith and practice, would not have reduced the principle for fellowship and communion to the two utilized by Horton and the Evangelical Theological Society. Most Evangelicals reject apostolic succession and any sacerdotal interpretation of the two Gospel sacraments. The Tractarians, however, accept all seven of the papist sacraments whole hog. Evangelical and Reformed Anglicans totally reject the Anglo-Catholic interpretation of the 39 Articles of Religion, the sacraments or any other Papist spin put on the English Reformation.
Even the National Association of Evangelicals has for all practical purposes become just another liberal ecumenical organization and is dominated by Pentecostals and Charismatics. Practically all the Reformed churches immediately after the separation from Rome formulated detailed confessions of faith, not short, pithy reductions to minimalist requirements. If the Scriptures contain everything a Christian is required to believe, then obviously reducing it all down to “Jesus wept” is unconscionable. (John 11:35).
Some Evangelicals and some Reformed pastors and teachers say that the basis for fellowship should be the ecumenical creeds. But this is simply a reduction of the Lambeth Quadrilateral into a more tolerable form. Although the ecumenical or catholic creeds are essential to saving faith, they are not the only essentials for saving faith. Additionally, a proper understanding of the five solas of the Reformation and the Law/Gospel distinction are absolutely necessary to a proper understanding of soteriology. Calvinism and Arminianism are mutually exclusive of one another and cannot be teaching the same Gospel message since for Arminians man saves himself ultimately by his own efforts to cooperate with God.
It seems to me that the only true basis for fellowship is to adhere to one of the Reformed standards consistently and along with that to affirm the catholic creeds. Everything else leads to either liberalism or to Rome or worse. (Anglican Formularies; Three Forms of Unity; Westminster Standards).
--
Reasonable Christian Blog Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost; Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen. 1662 Book of Common Prayer
George Conger Raises David Virtue's Dander
I do not generally read VirtueOnline because of its blatantly Anglo-Catholic bias. However, I was amused by this piece that David Virtue posted attacking George Conger's articles on the current situation with the Anglican Mission in America and the Rwandan house of bishops. Ironically, George Conger is an "orthodox" and "conservative" Anglo-Catholic who chose to remain within The Episcopal Church and work for reform. As most readers of my blog know, I do not consider Anglo-Catholics to be truly converted to the Christian faith. That would include "orthodox" Anglo-Catholics. I was banned from posting comments at VirtueOnline for stating my position in a polemical manner. Polemics seems to be the only way that these papist ecumenicalists get the message. (Jude 1:3-4)
Robin Jordan of the Anglicans Ablaze blog attended, Moving Forward Together, the recent meeting between the Rwanda bishops, conservative AMiA congregational leaders, and the archbishop of the Anglican Church in North America, Robert Duncan, who is also an avowed Anglo-Catholic. Robin hoped to persuade the more Evangelical and Reformed members of the AMiA to consider joining together in a new Reformed and Evangelical association of Anglicans. Whether or not that happens is unclear, although Robin said that the Reformed leaning Anglicans he spoke with at the conference were not convinced that there is no place for them in the Anglican Church in North America. The naivete of Evangelicals is truly astounding. They do not seem to realize that the borg mentality of Anglo-Papists is that they are welcome so long as they keep the Gospel under wraps and go along with the false gospel of the Anglo-Papists. That is assuming, of course, that these Evangelical Anglicans actually do understand the Gospel. The irony here is that Duncan was there to persuade the AMiA to go with the ACNA, while Archbishop Rwaje of the Anglican Church in Rwanda was there to try to bring about reconciliation between the AMiA and the Rwandan house of bishops.
I am unsure of exactly how Reformed and Evangelical the Rwanda Anglicans are. However, it would appear that they are not nearly as high church as the ACNA. Robin Jordan has been blogging for some time now about how Anglo-Catholic the doctrine and canons of the ACNA are. Most recently his critique of the new prayer book to be produced by the ACNA has been most insightful: ACNA: Theological Guiding Lens
David Virtue seems to think that Chuck Murphy and John Rodgers of the AMiA will be able work out a deal where the AMiA can join with the ACNA by this June. The more the merrier I suppose.
Robin Jordan of the Anglicans Ablaze blog attended, Moving Forward Together, the recent meeting between the Rwanda bishops, conservative AMiA congregational leaders, and the archbishop of the Anglican Church in North America, Robert Duncan, who is also an avowed Anglo-Catholic. Robin hoped to persuade the more Evangelical and Reformed members of the AMiA to consider joining together in a new Reformed and Evangelical association of Anglicans. Whether or not that happens is unclear, although Robin said that the Reformed leaning Anglicans he spoke with at the conference were not convinced that there is no place for them in the Anglican Church in North America. The naivete of Evangelicals is truly astounding. They do not seem to realize that the borg mentality of Anglo-Papists is that they are welcome so long as they keep the Gospel under wraps and go along with the false gospel of the Anglo-Papists. That is assuming, of course, that these Evangelical Anglicans actually do understand the Gospel. The irony here is that Duncan was there to persuade the AMiA to go with the ACNA, while Archbishop Rwaje of the Anglican Church in Rwanda was there to try to bring about reconciliation between the AMiA and the Rwandan house of bishops.
I am unsure of exactly how Reformed and Evangelical the Rwanda Anglicans are. However, it would appear that they are not nearly as high church as the ACNA. Robin Jordan has been blogging for some time now about how Anglo-Catholic the doctrine and canons of the ACNA are. Most recently his critique of the new prayer book to be produced by the ACNA has been most insightful: ACNA: Theological Guiding Lens
David Virtue seems to think that Chuck Murphy and John Rodgers of the AMiA will be able work out a deal where the AMiA can join with the ACNA by this June. The more the merrier I suppose.
Click here to see the original article at VirtueOnline: George Conger Raises David Virtue's Dander
Addendum: Robin Jordan corrected my comment above. He said that it was never his intention to proselytize anyone but rather was there to report on the situation and see what kinds of responses he would get from the more Evangelical side of the aisle.
--
Reasonable Christian Blog Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost; Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen. 1662 Book of Common Prayer
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
Horton and Tipton Talk: Justification and Union with Christ - Reformed Forum
This is a further discussion on the issue of justification by faith alone as the focus of the Gospel, versus the doctrine of union with Christ as the focus of Reformed theology as Tipton contends. However, Tipton overlooks the fact that union with Christ is by the means or instrument of faith, which faith is a living faith by which imputed justification is applied by God Himself to His elect. Dr. Horton participates by phone in this program.
Click here to see the Reformed Forum site and hear the episode: Justification and Union with Christ - Reformed Forum
Click here to see the Reformed Forum site and hear the episode: Justification and Union with Christ - Reformed Forum
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


