At the Heidblog, Dr. R. Scott Clark made  valid remarks regarding the current climate in Evangelicalism in an article  called Balanced  But Biting.  Dr. Clark was responding to an incident in which Mike  Horton was criticized in Christianity Today Magazine for saying that Rick Warren  has certain things wrong with his theology.  For this reason most of my  Calvinist friends are incredulous that John Piper is inviting Rick Warren to  speak at the next Desiring God Conference.  First of all, Rick Warren is  not even a Calvinist.  Second of all, Warren speaks anywhere to anybody as  if everybody is a Christian.  He even spoke at the  initiation of the new Anglican province in the United States, the Anglican  Church in North America.  Unfortunately, the AC-NA is predominated by  semi-pelagian and Anglo-Catholic theology which outright rejects the doctrine of  justification by faith alone.
 Personally, I like Mike Horton.  I  really do.  But my complaint with Mike Horton is not that he makes "biting"  remarks.  On the contrary, I think Dr. Mike is too easy on his  opponents.  A few months back on the White Horse Inn program Dr.  Horton interviewed David Virtue of VirtueOnline about the upcoming consecration  of Robert Duncan as the new Anglo-Catholic archbishop of the new AC-NA   province.  Not once did Mike ask any tough questions of David Virtue about  the theology of the predominance of Anglo-Catholicism in the AC-NA or how that  tradition does not accept the doctrines of grace or the five solas of the  Reformation.  In fact even conservative Anglo-Catholicism is  diametrically to Evangelicalism of any kind.  This is one reason why in  1873 the Reformed Episcopal Church seceded from the Protestant Episcopal  Church.  On that same program Mike interviewed C. FitzSimons Allison,  retired bishop of the  South Carolina Diocese of the Episcopal Church.  Dr. Horton did ask Rev.  Allison about the doctrine of justification by faith alone and of course the  bishop upheld that doctrine.  However, it was a clever way of avoiding  bringing up the issue with David Virtue.
 Evangelicals are so tolerant these days  that Anglican Evangelicals like the Sydney Anglicans are willing to  enter into full communion with the new Anglican Church in North America  while even acknowledging that there are significant theological differences with  Anglo-Catholics.  But my question is this.  Why is the Federal Vision  and the New Perspectives on Paul such a big issue for Presbyterians like Dr.  Horton and then nothing at all is even mentioned on The White Horse Inn program  about how the Tractarian movement in the past and today outright rejects the  Gospel?  The Sydney Anglicans, including Dr. Mark D. Thompson of Moore  Theological College, said on his blog and at the Anglican Church League blog  that conservative Anglo-Catholics are "orthodox."
 Well, if being morally and theologically  conservative makes a tradition "orthodox", then I suppose the Protestant  Reformation in general and the English Reformation in particular were completely  unnecessary.  After all, if Anglo-Catholics are preaching the true Gospel,  then it's merely a matter of theological preference.  Those stupid English  Reformers were burned at the stake for nothing.
 Really, the problem today is not polemics,  as Dr. Clark's article points out so clearly.  The real problem is no one  is willing to speak the truth at all.  I was banned from commenting at  VirtueOnline for daring to suggest that Anglo-Catholics are not "saved" because  their theology is a theology of merits and achieving justification and salvation  by one's own efforts.  The Federal Vision controversy in the various  presbyterian denominations, particularly the Presbyterian Church in America, is  analogous to Anglo-Catholicism except Anglo-Catholicism is worse!
 I think the real problem is that  Evangelicals are afraid to speak out for fear of being labeled  "fundamentalists."  But there comes a time when one has to step across the  line drawn in the sand and to say, "I'm a Christian.  Here I stand.  I  can do nothing other than this."  If Martin Luther was right, then the true  churches will stand or fall based on whether or not they uphold the Gospel and  justification by faith alone. Justificaton by faith alone is inherently a non-negotiable part of preaching  the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.
 I can say the same when it comes to the  Gordon H. Clark controversy over the hypostatic union of the divine nature and  the human nature in the Person of Jesus Christ.  Anyone who denies that  Jesus Christ is one person and is at the same time both fully divine and fully  human, then than person is not a Christian.  I recently had to rebuke some  online friends of mine and distance myself from them because they literally  attacked the incarnation of Jesus Christ and denied that  the Son of God could assume  human form without compromising or changing His deity.  I am really no one  special.  But the Reformed churches need more laymen and ministers who are  willing to be persecuted for the sake of truth.  I am calling for the God's  Hammer blog to stop promoting neo-Nestorianism and I do so because I am  committed to the truth.  I am willing to fight for the Gospel.  Every  Christian ought to care enough about the Gospel and the souls of their neighbors  to do as the apostles did in the first century:
 
And when they could not find them, they dragged Jason and some of the brothers before the city authorities, shouting, "These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also, (Acts 17:6 ESV)
  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.
 Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
3 comments:
I'm calling for you to remove my name from the two posts in which you accuse me of heresy.
While I appreciate your withdrawal in the combox of the earlier post, you'll understand that, since the accusations were mistaken in the first place, I'd rather they not stay up for anyone to read (and very probably never read your retraction).
Thanks.
Well, Patrick, since Sean has continuted to equivocate between the two minds or two wills view and the Nestorian view, and since you endorsed Sean's view as something "I" was not understanding, I think I'll just let things stand as they are until I review Clark's two books on the blog.
Dear Gospel-Servant,
If Warren is as nefarious as Horton painted him on April Fools Day @ his White Horse Inn blog, then Horton's embrace (literally) of Warren is akin to Luther calling the pope the antichrist one day and kissing his ring the next, or Paul hugging a Judaizer after writing that such should be "cut off" & ananthema!
See www.trinityfoundation.org/horror_show.php?id=51 for a piece the editor calls "Horton's Hypocrisy."
Yours for Christ & the gospel,
Hugh McCann
P.S. Hear Horton's White Horse radio shows with Anne Rice, where her Catholicism is never questioned, much less challenged.
Post a Comment